Article 96: Daytime search rule and exceptions

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 4825/2553 (2010)

   A warrantless night search of a house is not suspicious or unlawful where the circumstances fall within Section 92(4) read together with Section 96(2).

   The accused argued that searching the house at night without a warrant was suspicious. The court held it was not, because the circumstances fell within Section 92(4) together with Section 96(2), and affirmed the Court of Appeal, rejecting the accused's petition on this point.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 6403/2545 (2002)

   Where a search and arrest begin during daytime and are not finished, the officer may lawfully continue the search and arrest into the night under Section 96(1).

   The daily case record showed the officers began the search and arrest at 18:02, which was still daytime. Because the search was not yet finished, the court held the officers had power to continue it into the night under Section 96(1).

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 7387/2543 (2000)

   Although searches of a private place must ordinarily be by daytime under Section 96, a warrantless night search may fall within the urgency exception where drugs could easily be moved or destroyed at night and getting a warrant would cause delay.

   Officers had arrested a person with 95 methamphetamine tablets late in the afternoon near dark. Because drugs are easily moved at night and the police station was far from the court, obtaining a warrant would cause delay during which the drugs could be moved. The court held the case fell within the exception permitting a search without a warrant, notwithstanding the daytime rule in Section 96.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.