Just in case you thought Texas was the only place where criminals hid their drugs in awkward places, check out this Wisconsin butt crack warrant.

Diane, maybe Ted should add this to the TDCAA warrants book. Could be a lifesaver.

Ah, yes. The ol' butt crack warrant. We definitely need samples of that (with diagrams and illustrations, naturally) in the 2d edition of the Warrants Manual (coming in fall 2004!). In fact, I'm not sure how officers and prosecutors everywhere have done without such an investigative tool for this long.

Why didn't we include it in the first edition? I blame me. Thanks for the heads up. (Or would that be "tails up"??)

And he was a big guy, too! 270 lbs.??? That poor physician's assistant who attempted to remove the crack. I'm sure she doesn't get paid enough to do that.

I know that TDCAA is always looking for ways to assist law enforcement with new tools. How about selling special TDCAA butt crack searching gloves with the TDCAA logo on them? A dozen pair come free with a copy of the Search Warrants book.

Seems very similar to the old "Doo Doo Warrant." I once had an officer call me at home at 1:00 AM to see if I would draft one of these warrants. Seems three officers had personally witnessed a suspect swallow several rocks of suspected crack cocaine, and they believed the rocks would pass through the suspect's digestive system unharmed. They wanted a warrant to search the excrement from his bowels, and to keep him from making on a toilet for the next several days. I told him I expected another call back within the next 30 minutes, and it needed to be from the officer who was actually going to perform the search of the excrement. I did get a call back in 30 minutes, and they said that they didn't need the warrant after all, and that they thought a tampering charge would suffice.

Seems there is a new place for hiding stuff if you are an overweight inmate: read the story.

High court puts privacy limits on warrantless suspect search

Police reached in shorts to gather drug evidence
By Andrea F. Siegel
Sun Reporter

The state's highest court has thrown out the conviction of a repeat drug offender, ruling Monday that police had not given him enough privacy when they searched a common drug-stashing location: between his buttocks.

Baltimore County detectives could have searched the Fallston man at a police station or "in the privacy of a police van," Judge Clayton Greene Jr. wrote for the majority of the Court of Appeals. Instead, a gloved investigator searched John August Paulino at night at the Dundalk car wash where he was arrested and where his friends who were with him might have seen.

Greene called the search unconstitutional and unreasonable, writing that it was not an emergency and should not have been done in public.

But Judge Lynne A. Battaglia, a former U.S. attorney for Maryland, disagreed, saying that the majority opinion ties the hands of police.

"By holding as it does, the majority imper missibly restricts the police's ability to conduct reasonable searches under the Fourth Amendment for drugs that are secreted on an individual known to be carrying such drugs to prevent their loss," she wrote in the dissent.

The majority considered the search of Paulino a strip search. The dissent did not, but said that, even if it were a strip search, it was reasonable under the circumstances.

The attorney general's office, which argued that the search was valid, will consider asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

"Our office will be reviewing the opinion carefully to see if we will seek further review," said Kathryn Grill Graeff, chief of criminal ap peals.

David P. Henninger, one of Paulino's lawyers at his trial, said the crack cocaine confiscated in the illegal search was the key piece of evidence. Without it, Henninger said, the state has no case and no conviction.

He also said the ruling "is going to change search law a little bit in this state" because it limits how police peek into a popular drug- stashing place.

"We get these complaints all the time," Henninger said. "I've got two or three of these pending right now."

Andrew D. Levy, a lawyer in private practice who also teaches criminal law at the University of Maryland, said courts have to weigh the facts of a warrantless search to decide whether it fails to meet the standard for a reasonable search.

"It is a balancing test," he said. "The majority thought the search could have been done more privately without any harm to the police function."

Had police been able to show this was an emergency, the outcome might have been different, he said.

Baltimore County police spokesman Bill Toohey said he could not comment on the case or its impact because the department's lawyers have not had a chance to review the ruling. He also declined to say how often the department uses specific search techniques.

Police had received a tip from an informant that Paulino would be at the car wash the night of Sept. 29, 2000, and where he would be hiding the drugs. They arrested and searched him there.

Police said in a pretrial hearing that Paulino wore his pants fashionably low and that a detective lifted up Paulino's shorts while he was lying on the ground and pulled out the stash of drugs. Paulino, however, described a more intrusive search.

It was unclear from the court documents exactly how much the suspect's three friends saw of Paulino when he was searched.

Paulino, now 28, was convicted in 2001 of possession of drugs with intent to sell. As a repeat offender, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison without parole. It is unclear when he might be released from prison.

I guess I never told you all about the indecent exposure case I had in which the defendant had a used homemade dildo in the front seat, along with a knife and a skeleton mask, and was walking kinda funny. When they got him to the jail, they were surprised to find a second homemade dildo on the seat of the patrol car, along with a wet spot in the guy's pants. Ewwwwwwww....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gretchen:
I guess I never told you all about the indecent exposure case I had in which the defendant had a used homemade dildo in the front seat, along with a knife and a skeleton mask, and was walking kinda funny. When they got him to the jail, they were surprised to find a second homemade dildo on the seat of the patrol car, along with a wet spot in the guy's pants. Ewwwwwwww....

---

OK, mmm, first (giggling like Beavis), I can't believe you said "dildo". (more Beavis like giggling).

Second, I'm not gonna ask from what material or item the homemade impletations were fashioned, or why.

I'll leave that to Brumley or AP. Or Jane or JAS.

Finally, I won't even ask what that has to do with butt crack searches for crack cocaine.

We recently had a case where a female (won't call her a lady) got arrested. While she was being searched at book in, the jailer saw a piece of plastic dangling from her hooha. The jailer asked her, "What is that?" and the female quickly proceeded to push it in further. A frantic trooper called me and asked me for a search warrant. I asked him if she would consent to being taken to the ER for the exam, and she (amazingly) did. The sick part was that the doctor couldn't find anything. Good to know we have a cavity search warrant in the book.

That doesn't sound biodegradable.

So I should be glad to hear about this but something tells me that things won't change much, this search warrant won't bring any significant positive results in fighting drugs, I don't want to put too much hopes, that's my nature.
Kurt, Drug treatment center consluant

While Stewart was being transported to jail, he began complaining of chest pain. While officers were checking on Stewart they noticed white rocks falling from his pant leg. Once at the hospital while Stewart was being disrobed, officers saw a couple of crack rocks fall from his underwear. The arresting officer then collected more crack rocks, marijuana and yellow pills from Stewart's buttocks.

Details.

Specifically, the Appellant Rondrick Gray was forced to undergo a proctoscopic examination under sedation pursuant to a warrant obtained on the police's belief that he was concealing crack cocaine in his rectum.

During the proctoscopy, Flynn was unable to completely visualize the rectal vault due to a "substantial amount of fecal debris." He did, however, intermittently see and feel something different from the other contents of the rectum. Flynn removed the scope and performed a second digital rectal examination, during which Flynn removed a plastic bag from Gray's rectal cavity. Flynn placed the plastic bag into a biohazard bag provided by the emergency department, and handed the bag to an SAPD officer. Subsequent testing revealed the contents of the bag recovered from Gray's rectum to be 9.62 grams of cocaine base.

Details.

No comment on the adulterants or dilutants?

There's a pretty good potential for a funny a__ joke.

Turns out it was high quality S___.