[Captain Bill]

I went out on the web and looked at the Villamonte-Marquez decision and as I read it, it would seem to only apply to the Coast Guard and Customs/border patrol. It also seemed to me to be strictly construed in the case of the coast guard to be limited to inspection of documentation and actually did not allow for general search of non-public areas of the boat. It did seem to allow the customs people to do searches of any vessel anywhere in the US. It did not say anything about allowing state law enforcement officers the same privilege. In fact, the only inference I saw that it would allow any law enforcement officers to board and search a vessel was in the dissenting opinion which does not have the force of law. The opinion as I read it simply stated that CG and Customs officials are allowed to board your boat to inspect documentation and in this specific case did not have to close their eyes to bales of marijuana they saw in the cabin after smelling same. I think that it takes a very "liberal" reading of the decision to say it allows state law enforcement agencies such as the FWC to board any boat and search it. I don't even see that it allows them to board your boat without a warrant or probable cause. If this is the decision state law enforcement is using to justify random boardings, some savvy lawyer should have their lunch. Are their additional decisions that clearly give this right to state Law enforcement. I have a real problem these days with the general suspension of constitutional rights in this country. I have an issue knowing that the government has the right without a duly sworn warrant to break into my vessel even while it's in its berth just because they get a wild hair. I am old enough to remember when we had a free country.