"ThanksRay, I thought so."

Exactly. You 'thought' you were correct, but are indeed wrong. It's common knowledge and commom sense (well to most of us) that no police/DNR/etc has absolutely no power over Constitutional rights. Yes, a DNR officer can step foot an any land he wants to...as long as it's to "enforce" a violation...which we covered many times (as well as the facts I've layed out asto what they can and can not do, not to mentionSupreme Court rulings which led to thelaws governing privacy...specifically private property).

How can you fail to understand the obvious so many times?

GregH.

I know in Indiana that if an officer has probable cause and actsto search/seizure of a person, vehical, house, building, land,computer...it must be filed in a report. Ask for a report of the incident. If he has not done so, your land owner could push for a reason as to why he was there...and eventually press charges (ifhe HAD to file a report, that's Indiana's law). Your picture would have to be used as evidence if doing so. (If nothing was stolen, just reporting him trespassing would be enough for a reprimand..which would keep him off the land).

We must understand that there is a fundamental difference in code enforcement and to CHECK for code violations. If an officer is merely wandering around on your land checking for violations, he is trespassing. If he has cause to be there to ENFORCE a violation, it's ok. But there is a difference.
Greg, I would want to know what the heck he was doing there as well. Let us know what you find out.

Once again, GregH's lease is in IL not IN. Laws vary from state to state. Once again you are wrong. A police officer actuallylegally violates a persons rights when they are arrested. They are searched with probable cause incident to an arrest, their vehicle are searched with probable cause on the smell of cannibis or an open alcoholic beverage. A person is searched on a Terry stop to check for weapons without a warrant. Felons cannot possessfirearms. If an order of protection isissued against you all your guns are gone. There are manyoccasions when a police officerlegally violations a persons constitutional rights withouta warrant.I arrest people all the time, not every arrest or incident has to have a report. A charging document, a notice of arrest without warrant, a traffic citation for speeding does not require a report. If a conservation officer had to have probable cause or reasonable suspicion that a crime has been commited to enter your land it would have stated it that way. As a police officerI can go onto your property to investigate suspected criminal activity as long asI am a reasonable distance from your residence.There are also instances were a warrant is not needed to enter into a residence. If there is fresh pursuit(a suspect fleeing)or it is believed that evidence would be destroyed a police officer can enter into a dwelling, secure the residence and then obtain a warrant to search. I am off for the next two days. When I go back to work I will get you all the case law, IL. statue and supreme court rulings dealing with this. I READ THEM AND RECIEVE TRAINING ON THEM ALL THE TIME!

GO RAMS!

Let's break things down again. Please note, I list nationwide rights, not individual state statutes unless I note them as being derived from Indiana (such as the reporting of a potential crime).

Everything you stated are exceptions in special cases.

The constititional "law of frisk" has two sub-categories:

"A frisk is ALWAYS justified in the following circumstances:[*]
there are concerns of safety for the officer and for others [*]
there is suspicion that the suspect is armed & dangerous [*]
there is suspicion that the suspect is about to commit a crime & a weapon is commonly used "

and.........

A frisk MAY be justified in the following circumstances:
[ul][*]
the officer is alone and backup has not yet arrived [*]
the number of suspects and their physical size [*]
the emotions, behavior, and look of the suspects [*]
the suspect gave evasive answers (that didn't dispel fear) during the initial stop [*]
the time of day, and the geographical surroundings (not sufficient by themselves to justify a frisk)
[/ul]
Also, there is a whole article dealing with "SPECIAL SITUATIONS"

AUTOMOBILE STOPS. If a vehicle has been stopped and the occupants exit the vehicle, the officer has a right to search the passenger compartment of the vehicle for weapons (any area involving quick access) even if the occupants check out and will be released. This prevents them from returning to the vehicle and using the weapons against the officer.

Wow, this thread is still going...

I think what everyone is curious about is, "Why is there a conservation police officer on the property?" Once you find that out (good luck by the way w/ that GregH), then you can proceed w/ probable cause, etc.

If he's got a reason to be there, then so be it...but there is no way in hell I would want a police officer on my land. For some of you that believe it's not a big deal he's there, OR that if it was your land, you would actually be happy that he's there "protecting" your land...watching over it, etc. I just don't get it...and be careful what you wish for.

Again, IF there is probable cause, then no big deal, but I would still be curious as to what that probable cause was.

GregH, just keep us posted as to any new info you get...

The original reason for my post is to help GregH out. Not to argue the law. I get that enough at work from people riding in the back of my car. They always end up finding out different when they get before a judge. In this case I am " done with it " Pat the only thing I can tell you is if you ever go to Illinois and get pulled over. Don't tell the officer how to do his job, it will likely result in a citation. GregH, I believe I know this guy and can call him and find out what is going on for you. It was probably something simple. Just let me know what county you hunt and I'll give him a call.

NO, it's not something simple. The guy is messing up the mans hunt and deer movement. He doesns't belong there. I assume he had to walk considerable distance off the trail to get to this location. He's snooping, probably for personnal satisfaction and nothing to do with THE LAW.

Would it be ethical to shoot him with a pod, or to plant drugged donuts around the area?