Law & Order

Season 2 Episode 4

Asylum

2
Aired Monday 10:00 PM Oct 08, 1991 on NBC
8.1
out of 10
User Rating
45 votes
1

EPISODE REVIEWS
By TV.com Users

Episode Summary

EDIT
The stabbing death of a man in front of a coffee shop leads detectives to a local homeless man, but the conviction is threatened on appeal based on the lack of a search warrant for his "home", which was a lean-to in Central Park.

Who was the Episode MVP ?

Today
2:00pm
WGNAMER
3:00pm
WGNAMER
SUND
4:00pm
SUND
5:00pm
DWB
SUND
6:00pm
SUND
7:00pm
SUND
8:00pm
SUND
9:00pm
SUND
10:00pm
SUND
11:00pm
SUND
12:00am
SUND
Tuesday
1:00am
SUND
1:05am
TNT
2:00am
SUND
2:05am
TNT
4:05am
TNT
5:05am
TNT
2:00pm
WGNAMER
3:00pm
WGNAMER
4:00pm
WE
5:00pm
WE
6:00pm
WE
7:00pm
WE
8:00pm
WE
Wednesday
3:05am
TNT
4:00am
TNT
6:05am
TNT
7:00am
TNT
2:00pm
WGNAMER
3:00pm
WGNAMER
4:00pm
WE
5:00pm
WE
6:00pm
WE
7:00pm
WE
8:00pm
WE
10:00pm
WE
11:00pm
WE
SUBMIT REVIEW
  • When a seriously, mentally ill homeless man kills a man outside of a coffee shop, his conviction hinges on whether or not the Constitutional protections in the 4th Amendment apply to the homeless man's residents; a lean-to in Central Park.moreless

    8.0
    Great episode that focuses not so much on whether the defendant committed the crime, he did, or whether or not he is mentally ill, he is. Instead the episode's story takes a good, hard look at the complex and very practical challenges in applying Constitutional law to someone who is indigent or homeless.



    Clearly, the writers did their homework when writing this episode because the cited case law and competing ethical and legal theories are all quite good and (for the most Part) real.



    The episode does not shy away from the Constitutional law or the very real and complex issues of public health and safety as well as the human rights and dignity of the indigent-homeless people. If the indigent's make-shift shelter in Central Park counts as a residence, then a search warrant needed to be obtained PRIOR to a search or seizure. Otherwise it violated the Constitutional.



    If the search was not illegal, the crucial evidence obtained cannot be used, which would probably mean that the defendant would be released.



    Yet, if the court rules that the indigent-defendant outside, Central Park 'house' was not really a house in terms of Constitutional law, then a precedent could be set that undermines the basic legal rights of other indigent or homeless people.



    It is a serious legal-ethical dilemma that is wonderfully written and executed.moreless
Dann Florek

Dann Florek

Capt. Don Cragen

Richard Brooks

Richard Brooks

A.D.A. Paul Robinette

Michael Moriarty

Michael Moriarty

Exec. A.D.A. Ben Stone

Steven Hill

Steven Hill

D.A. Adam Schiff

Paul Sorvino

Paul Sorvino

Sgt. Phil Cerreta

Chris Noth

Chris Noth

Det. Mike Logan

Matthew Cowles

Matthew Cowles

Christian 'Lemonhead' Tatum

Guest Star

Ron McLarty

Ron McLarty

Mr. Scoler

Guest Star

Elizabeth Lawrence

Elizabeth Lawrence

Elsie Hatch

Guest Star

Carolyn McCormick

Carolyn McCormick

Dr. Elizabeth Olivet

Recurring Role

Trivia, Notes, Quotes and Allusions

FILTER BY TYPE

  • TRIVIA (0)

  • QUOTES (11)

    • Dr. Elizabeth Olivet: (correcting Cragen) He's psychotic; he's not psychopathic.
      Phil Cerreta: What's the difference?
      Dr. Elizabeth Olivet: Psychotic is when you believe the doorman was sent from Planet X to put mind control devices in your teeth. Psychopathic is when you blow the doorman away and take out twenty other people while you're at it.

    • Mike Logan: Let's say it was a mugger. He got scared off before he could get to the money.
      Phil Cerretta: Or maybe he just got mad because somebody kicked his box.
      Mike Logan: Well, wouldn't you?
      Phil Cerreta: Don't you kick my box!

    • Phil Cerreta: What can you tell us about the ring?
      Christian 'Lemonhead' Tatum: When is Mr. Rehnquist getting here?
      Mike Logan: Oh, listen, he's caught up in a Supreme Court thing. Hang tight.

    • (Reviewing police line-up.)
      Phil Cerreta: Take your time.
      Ms. Murdoch: I want the good-looking one. Bachelor number two.

    • Ms. Murdoch: How come every freak in the country lives in New York? Why don't some of you people move to Nebraska?
      Sal Violet: I'm from Nebraska, sweetie. How do you think I got this way?

    • Elsie Hatch: And night before last, there was a naked man with a crossbow, running up and down West 74th Street.
      Mike Logan: Where did he keep the arrows?

    • Mike Logan: Ms. Fahey, we are attempting to extract a confession from your client.
      Ms. Fahey: (makes an obscene gesture) Extract this, Logan.

    • Christian 'Lemonhead' Tatum: I want that reward.
      Phil Cerreta: I thought Polesky was your friend.
      Christian 'Lemonhead' Tatum: I'm flexible.
      Mike Logan: Crazy, not stupid.

    • Ben Stone: You didn't have a warrant to search the appellant's place of abode.
      Mike Logan: Place of abode, huh? It was in the damn bushes.

    • Mr. Scoler: Well, my client won't be very happy, but at least he'll have a roof over his head for the next twenty-five years.
      Ben Stone: Well, there's Lemonhead -- rubber cell at Bellevue. And Nathan Robbins -- he's got six feet of dirt over his head. So what's happy got to do with it?

    • Homeless Man: He was sitting under that tree drinking Scotch.
      Mike Logan: This doesn't look like the Scotch-and-soda crowd to me.

  • NOTES (1)

  • ALLUSIONS (2)

    • Appellate Judge Rosenblum: And the same court in 'Oliver' specifically refused to extend the Fourth Amendment protection to open fields.

      In Oliver v. U.S. (1984), Ray Oliver challenged his arrest for cultivating cannabis. Two Kentucky state officers acted on a tip of marijuana growing. They drove onto Oliver's land and up to a gate which was marked "No Trespassing." They walked along a path around the gate onto Oliver's property, continuing down the road for nearly a mile, where they spotted a large marijuana crop on his property and arrested him. The Supreme Court ruled that "[A]n individual may not legitimately demand privacy for activities conducted out of doors in fields, except in the area immediately surrounding the home...open fields do not provide the setting for those intimate activities that the Amendment is intended to shelter from government interference or surveillance."

    • Ben Stone: What's Ackerman relying on?
      Paul Robinette: Sympathy. And a 1967 Supreme Court decision, Katz vs. US. The majority held that the police could not tap a public phone without a warrant.

      In Katz vs. U.S. (1967), Charles Katz challenged his arrest for illegal gambling by the FBI on the basis of their tapping his phone conversations from a public telephone booth, where he would place his bets. The Supreme Court ruled that "the Fourth Amendment protects people--and not simply areas," and the issue of police search in public places should be evaluated by a two-fold test: a) whether the person exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy and b) whether the expectation is one that society would recognize as reasonable.

More
Less