No they are wrong,
they claim there was a valid warrant there was no consent, a judge cannot order consent, the owner must consent IN WRITING that they allow the search. verbal agreements don't hold up in court. It has to be written down and signed by the owner and judge. The state isn't arguing that, they claim the search warrant was valid.
they claim there was a valid warrant there was no consent, a judge cannot order consent, the owner must consent IN WRITING that they allow the search. verbal agreements don't hold up in court. It has to be written down and signed by the owner and judge. The state isn't arguing that, they claim the search warrant was valid.