Can police search my home with arrest warrant for a former tenant who lived there before?

I'd say there are a lot of problems with the entry/search of your home.

It certainly sounds like you have an excellent defense.

It would depend on the contents of the arrest warrant.

Yes, if the police have a search warrant for that address.

I believe that the search was unlawful if they knew "John" was not present. If these facts are provable, you may have grounds for a law suit against the police for violating your civil rights.

It sounds like you may very well have grounds to attempt to have the charges against you dropped or dismissed. This is an assessment which can only be made in full by consulting directly with an attorney and providing them with all of the facts of the case.

A good attorney would argue that the entry into the house was a pretext since they had already found "John". He would try to get it and the evidence found suppressed.

I would recommend that you consult with an attorney to assist you with this matter. This answer does not contain specific legal advice; if you need specific legal advice for your particular circumstances, please directly retain and consult an attorney to assist you with your particular issue. Simply because of person is charged or being investigated does not mean that they will ultimately be convicted. Everyone charged in a criminal case is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Speaking generally, warrants and searches are a huge deal in alleged narcotics offenses. The prosecution often relies heavily on evidence obtained during a search. Issues related to warrants, traffic stops, or other related seizures may ultimately be argued all the up to the Michigan Supreme Court. A small number of these issues even wind up in front of the United States Supreme Court. If a defense attorney can bring before the court, in good faith, a motion to suppress a traffic stop, arrest or investigative warrant, or other seizure, the outcome of that motion will often radically change the direction of a case. I strongly encourage you to obtain council to assist you with this matter. Most attorneys provide free initial consultations. It is certainly worth a few phone calls.

Wow, you raise a lot of very interesting issues worthy of a law school criminal law final exam. First, did they have just an arrest warrant and / or a search warrant? You probably don't know. Second, the warrant(s) may not be valid if they had bad information that they should have know that "John" was not there - or maybe it was reasonable for them to think he was there. The police have the right to do an officer safety pat down of anyone on the premises and handcuff you. Then again, did they find the drugs via "plain feel" or did they maneuver the object around first? Bottom line: You need competent representation and we can defend you against these charges.

With an arrest warrant, an officer can make reasonable entry to effect the arrest. An arrest warrant is not a search warrant. You should seek the assistance of a competent criminal defense attorney to review this matter as to whether the police actions were appropriate and whether they violated your constitutional rights.

Based on the facts presented it sounds like the police acted improperly. The evidence against you could possibly be suppressed and you may have a civil claim for damages because of what they did. You will have to file a Notice of Claim within ninety days of the incident. You should consult with an attorney right away.

It seems that if everything you say is true, that you may have a civil rights claim, or at least a claim to exclude evidence found within the curtilege of the home which was improperly found. You will need to discuss this with your attorney. If you do not have an attorney, you may contact my office to further discuss your case.

CAN they? Sure. They did. Was it right? Maybe not. What could you do about it if you had not been arrested? Probably nothing effective. Of course you can now fight the charges. When arrested or charged with any crime, the proper questions are, can any evidence obtained in a search or confession be used against you, and can you be convicted, and what can you do? Raise all possible defenses with whatever admissible and credible witnesses, evidence and facts are available for legal arguments, for evidence suppression or other motions, or at trial. While this isn't a 'capital case', you certainly face potential jail and fines, so handle it right. Effective plea-bargaining, using those defenses, could possibly keep you out of jail, or at least dramatically reduce it. Go to trial if it can't be resolved with motions or a plea bargain. There is no magic wand to wave and make it all disappear. Not exactly a do it yourself project in court for someone who does not know how to effectively represent himself against a professional prosecutor intending to convict and jail you. If you don't know how to do these things effectively, then hire an attorney that does, who will try to get a dismissal, diversion, reduction or other decent outcome through plea bargain, or take it to trial if appropriate.

You need a good lawyer who is ready to put some work into investigation (and probably an investigator, too.) First, after reading your whole question it leads me to ask you - why would they do this to you? Why would the cops make up the desire to arrest a person, supposedly get a warrant, go his place & leave him alone, but then later come to your place and harass you? Generally, if police do something to make up an excuse to enter a home, car, etc., it is because they suspect crime is occurring but they cannot get the proof they need to get a warrant. If this is true, up to the lawyer. If it is not true, then why you? Why risk their careers to hassle you? Anyway, if the police had a warrant - that can be confirmed or disproved. If they did not, then they absolutely had no right to enter. (Just because John is on probation does not mean he did not have a warrant. He could have a motion to revoke probation, he could have a new case, he could owe child support, etc.) If they had a warrant, go to the next step. Did they already go to John's house before they came to yours? (still wondering why . . . ) If so, this will show that they are lying in any claim that they had reasonable belief that John lived there and was there. Which combines with entry into the home - what was their basis for entering the home if you said that there was no John. (I have not researched this but I think their belief needs support, and not just "old" information. In most cases, the cops sit on a house and wait to see the person they are looking for to enter if their information is not really fresh.) I think this is going to cause the evidence to get suppressed. But, even if they could get into the home, how in the heck can they justify going into your pocket?! There is a Supreme Court case on "plain feel" that says that before a cop can get in your pocket when they pat you down for officer safety, they must be able to tell via the touch outside of the clothes that what they are feeling is contraband. No guesses, no supposing. The packaging will affect this issue. Anyway, hire a lawyer who is ready to do battle with the State and knows a bit about suppressing illegally obtained evidence. This case sounds like it as several avenues of potential problems for the State.

Illegal search questions are notoriously complicated and these facts raise a lot of issues. However, under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 9 of the Oregon Constitution, the general rule is that an arrest warrant carries with it the limited authority to enter a home when there is a reason to believe the suspect is within. Absent a reasonable basis to believe the suspect is inside a home, the police may not justify entry on the basis of an arrest warrant alone. If the police violated this rule, the subsequent search of your residence and your person was unlawful and all evidence derived (the drugs) should be suppressed. When something is "suppressed," that means they cannot use it as evidence against you in a trial.Of course, if you are charged with a drug crime and the State cannot produce the drugs or observations of the drugs at trial, it has no case against you. Here, it appears that the police did not have a reasonable basis to believe that the subject of the arrest warrant (John) was inside your home because (1) police officers had identified him at a different residence approximately 1.5 hours prior; (2) the suspect was not the current tenant and not on the current lease; (3) the police may have had access to John's current address through the probation office. This alone may be enough to invalidate the search. Even if a judge decided that the police had a reasonable belief that the suspect was in your home, the arrest warrant did not provide the police with the authority to search your person; it only provided the authority to arrest the suspect. The police will need to show some justification, other than the arrest warrant, for going through your pockets. Although the police are authorized to search your person and areas under your immediate control after they have validly placed you under arrest, this rule does not apply if the arrest is not valid in the first place. It does not appear that the police officers had probably cause to place you under arrest, so they cannot rely on that as a justification for searching your pockets. There are other potential justifications for searching your pockets which depend on the precise facts and circumstances of the situation. But based on the limited facts as you have related them, it sounds like there is a meritorious motion to suppress the drugs.

You need to retain an experienced criminal attorney as soon as possible. Make sure you give him all the information and get a copy of the police report through a FOIA request soon to have your attorney review. He can get a copy of the warrant to review. There may be enough evidence to suppress the evidence against you, but an attorney with all the facts and information will be able to give you a more accurate response.

It sounds as if you have a great basis for a motion to suppress. Find an experienced criminal defense attorney to fight the charges against you. Give the attorney the information you have on "John" so that a private investigator can take a written statement from him, if necessary, for future use at trial.