...Fourth Amendment Summary Jesus Lozano-McNeely Alonso Butts, Blair Smith CJA/364 Criminal Procedures University of Phoenix Mr. Dennis Dougan September 15, 2014 Fourth Amendment Summary Team C will define and explain the common law background of the Fourth Amendment. This paper will break down the basic terminology of the Fourth Amendment in which protects persons, house, paper and effects. From unreasonable search and seizures. Search warrant on a Person A search warrant gives the law enforcement officers permission to search for certain evidence in a specific place. Without a search warrant, police officers may not search a place without its owner’s consent or if the evidence is in plain view. It is supported by the Fourth Amendment “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Law. Cornell 2012)”. A search warrant is granted by courts where a judge needs to sign of it if he or she thinks the warrant is necessary. The officers must have probable cause when trying to obtain a warrant. When officers put in for a warrant, judges may issue the search warrant. To obtain a warrant, an officer must show that the search is justified and should have sworn statements that support their...
Words: 1176 - Pages: 5
...Exigent Circumstances to Search and Seizure The Fourth Amendment to The Constitution of the United States Kirk H. Andersen Park University July 2012 Abstract One of the greatest rights the Founding Fathers of the United States of America gave to its citizens was the right against unreasonable search and seizure. This right is guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. When this right is abridged by the government, what recourse does the citizen have to try and right this wrong? The appellate court system, up to the United States Supreme Court, was created to protect citizens rights. However, the courts have found, that under certain circumstances the government is capable of executing a search or seizure without a warrant as the Fourth Amendment so requires. This paper addresses exigent circumstances to search and seizure. Exigent Circumstances to Search and Seizure The Fourth Amendment to The Constitution of the United States The Constitution of the United States is the basic document that governs the citizens of the United States of America. The framers of the Constitution wrote it with deep emotions in response to how the American Colonies had been treated under the British Crown. The Fourth Amendment, in particular, to protect citizens from unreasonable search and seizure, was written in response to how the colonist had been subject to writs of assistance, which were warrants that British Customs Officers and soldiers...
Words: 1654 - Pages: 7
... however, those powers remain in the whole body of the people; furthermore, in the event that any administrators were to deviate from truth, justice and equity, they verge towards tyranny, and are to be opposed.1 The fate of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution can be construed as an example supporting Otis’ argument. Nearly every facet of political thought in the United States has proven to be far more malleable than its original authors had intended, an excellent example of this is the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The text of the Fourth Amendment appears seemingly straightforward; the first clause of the amendment states that all searches and seizures must be reasonable, the second clause of the amendment specifies requirements for when courts may issue a warrant in support of a search or seizure.2 Surprisingly, the concept that warrantless searches and seizures are unconstitutional or that warrants are required for all searches and seizures is relatively modern. Prior to this mindset of warrantless search and seizures being unconstitutional, law enforcement was allowed to do a search and seize items as long as their actions could be construed as being reasonable. In the event that the searches and seizures were unreasonable, the law enforcement officers would be held accountable for their actions in the form of being liable for damages suffered from the trespass in addition to punitive damages.3 This potential liability often served...
Words: 703 - Pages: 3
...throughout the years. The exclusionary rule, in addition to three court cases, which have had a direct impact on the rule, will be examined in this case study. The court cases are Weeks v. United States (1914), Rochin v. California (1952), and Mapp. Ohio (1961). The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and how it operates is accordance to the exclusionary rule, will also be studied. Additionally, this case study will examine logical searches and how they may have pertained to the three court cases. Exclusionary Rule The exclusionary rule is an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment by the Supreme Court, it is not part of the U.S. Constitution (Dempsey, 2013). When written, the Bill of Rights only applied to “agents of the federal government—not to those of local governments—the Court first applied the exclusionary rule only to federal courts and federal law enforcement officers.” (Dempsey, 2013, p.179) In court cases, the rule has progressed as an interpretation of the Fourth Amendment by the Supreme Court, which forbids any irrational search and seizure of a citizen. Illegally confiscated evidence cannot be utilized against a defendant in a court, as it violates the Fourth Amendment, thus, the evidence can be perceived prohibited (Oaks, 1970). Providing fair trials is a responsibility of the courts, and prosecuting attorney’s would not have a fair advantage by admitting evidence collected was outside the rule of law. The exclusionary rule is a rule created...
Words: 1934 - Pages: 8
...suspicion that the person is armed and threatening. The Court recognized that the Fourth Amendment protects the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person. At the same time, it recognized that in certain circumstances, public safety might require a limited "seizure," or stop, of an individual against his will. The Court consequently set forth conditions circumscribing when and how the police might conduct a Terry stop. They include what has become known as the "reasonable suspicion" standard. 392 U. S., at 20-22. Justice White, in a separate concurring opinion, set forth further conditions. Justice White wrote: "Of course, the person stopped is not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest, although it may alert the officer to the need for continued observation." Id., at 34. After Terry v. Ohio case, police officers only needed reasonable suspicion to search a person for weapons. However, the search is strictly limited to weapons. The case did not do much to change law enforcement or policing. It did, however, codify law enforcement officer's rights to self-protection during citizen 'contacts or stops for "reasonable suspicion" only. Police are entitled to search a suspect based on reasonable suspicion rather than the much higher standard of probable cause. A police officer now has the right to detain and search any individual, without...
Words: 1027 - Pages: 5
...Issue: Whether the fourth amendment search and seizure constitutional right was in violation in Encinitas, Ca. when Mike Pilazzio and his passenger, Mrs. Walden was pulled over after Mr. Pilazzio crossed a sold double yellow line, not giving him permission to search his belongings in result finding a purse full of crack cocaine without probable cause. Rule: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.(1) Exclusionary rule: There are thirteen exclusions to the Fourth Amendment rule, which follows: Probable cause, Consent searches, Probation searches, Search incident to arrest, Stop & Frisk, Exigent circumstances, Plain view, Vehicle searches- the search and seizure of stolen or forfeited goods, or goods subject to a duty, and the personal effects searched or seized for evidence. If a vehicle is impounded or if there is probable cause, law enforcement does not need a warrant. Border searches, Open fields, abandoned property, Consent searches, Administrative (2) Does not support the case: Carroll v. United States Robbins v. California Does support the case: Knowles v. Iowa Wyoming v. Houghton History: On the morning of November 12, 2013, Mr. Mike Pilazzio...
Words: 2277 - Pages: 10
...Our founding fathers in their quest to set forth protections of citizens enacted the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. (GPOaccess.gov/constitution) The purpose behind this amendment is the people have the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures”. At face value you may believe that this amendment provides you with total protection from an illegal search and seizure. In this paper I will demonstrate that the Fourth Amendment does not cover searches that occur in open fields or for items that are observed in plain view. In order to form an opinion on the constitutionality of a warrantless search you first need to determine what an open field is and what would be considered private property. This is known as the Open Fields Doctrine. (Wetterer, 1998) Items in open fields are not protected by the Fourth Amendment so they can be seized by an officer without a warrant or probable cause. Open fields do not fall within any of these categories. What does “open fields” exactly mean? Open fields encompass any open, undeveloped property that is not intimately used for dwelling (including curtilage) or business. The main residence on a piece of land, any outbuildings closely connected with and in close proximity to it, and the land immediately surrounding the residence are all considered to be within the curtilage of the land and are areas in which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy...
Words: 1733 - Pages: 7
...The Fourth Amendment: Search and Seizure Erek Anderson, Rachel Coen, Lawana Garfias, Malerie Gomez, Nicholas Tellez & Sara Ungerer CJA/364 February 16, 2015 Instructor: Bobby Kemp Search and Seizure Search and seizures are highly debated topics in the United States. Stop and frisk, automobile searches and border searches all fall within the guidelines of the Fourth Amendment. Discussed in this paper will be what reasonable searches, seizures and arrests are and how they are applied. Also to be discussed is whether probable cause is needed during warrantless searches and how the right to privacy is weighed. Finally, this paper will discuss how America’s borders are being protected by the Fourth Amendment, and what exceptions to the rule are necessary to protect America’s security interests. Stop-and-Frisk The definition of a “stop and frisk” is when the police temporarily detain a person and “pat down” their outer clothing if a law enforcement officer believes a suspect is armed and dangerous (Center for Public Education, 2015). For example, if a person is observed walking back and forth in front of jewelry store, meets another person around the corner from the store, and an officer observes one person handing the other person something which they put into their jacket. The officer can stop and frisk that suspect because they will have a reasonable suspicion that the suspects could be armed, and are possibly going to commit a crime. A frisk, by definition, is a...
Words: 2528 - Pages: 11
...Understanding the search and seizure laws; that govern all law enforcement and private security perssonel. Next the paper looks at the laws for surveillance by the police. After that this paper is investigating the idea of cameras in the school system legal or not, for protection or is it a violation of the fourth amendment rights to the students. Last the paper looks at surveillance by private security. Understanding Search and Seizure Law The police are governed by the 4th Amendment to the U.S. constitution which places limits on the power they have. For the police to make arrests, search a person or their property they have to work under the fourth amendment, which are the laws set for search and seizure. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" (The Charters of Freedom, nd). The fourth amendment provides for the search and seizure and is all about privacy of the people. Because of this freedom, the fourth amendment protects against “unreasonable” searches and seizures by any law enforcement authorities. On the other-hand the fourth amendment permits all search and seizures that are reasonable. Because of this amendment the police...
Words: 1689 - Pages: 7
...Search and Seizure of Cell Phone Courtney Henry COMM/215 12 May 2014 Virginia Stewart Search and Seizure of Cell Phone It is in the best interest of everyone not to have their cell phone search and seize during a routine traffic stop or when arrested. Although the police may or may not have probable cause, that shouldn’t give the police the right to search and seize your phone without a warrant. It is in the best interest of everyone because your Fourth Amendment right is being violated and your privacy is being taking away from you. Your cell phone should be considered as your property as stated in the fourth amendment, which cannot be searched without a warrant. Your cell phone contains a lot of sensitive information such as banking information, medical records, personal photos, videos, names of friends, and associates that you wouldn’t want for anyone else to know. Even if an arrest is being made for a major traffic violation such as DWI, excessive speeding, driving reckless, or the suspicion of a crime, a police offer should produce a warrant to justify the search and seizure of your cell phone. Probable Cause During a routine traffic stop, a police officer has a lot of power to their discretion. If they pull you over for speeding, not wearing your seat belt, having expired tags or a blown taillight, they may give you a ticket or give you a warning. In the most extreme case they may arrest you for not wearing your seatbelt or if you have an outstanding warrant...
Words: 1312 - Pages: 6
...Knowing how to legally search a person, place or thing and properly seize evidence are conditions to the investigative process. Officers also must have a clear understanding of when a search and/or arrest warrant is required and when it is not. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable government searches and seizures of their persons, houses, and effects. It states no warrants shall be issued unless there is probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and specifically describes the place to be searched and the person or things to be seized. However, both the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts have specified limited exceptions to the Fourth Amendment search warrant requirement. The seven exceptions to the Fourth Amendment...
Words: 1796 - Pages: 8
... The fourth amendment | The fourth amendment Like many other areas of American law the fourth amendment finds its history rooted in English law. Which basically states a man's home is his castle. The fourth amendment is part of the Bill of Rights with guards against unreasonable search and seizures it also requires that a Warrant be judicially issued as well as there has to be probable cause. It was adopted during the American Revolution. Search and seizures including arrest should be limited to the scope of the Warrant with specific areas are items to be searched or a specific person arrested. The fourth amendment protects the home, papers and effects against unreasonable search and seizures. There are a few exceptions to this law one if the person gives consent to search no warrant is required. Another exception is if an officer sees something in plain view. Open fields such as pastors open water would be searched without warrant because they're open there is no expectation of privacy. Computers and privacy Over the last decade, courts decided whether the government can access evidence of illegal activity stored on digital technology without violating the Fourth Amendment. Many cases discuss whether incriminating evidence stored by an employee in workplace computers is protected under the reasonable expectation of privacy. In a majority of cases, employees do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy for electronic communications at work. the Fourth Amendment...
Words: 597 - Pages: 3
...is collected, and the what the Fourth Amendment means. This is done by examining several aspects of the Fourth Amendment, and recent articles on the NSA. Upon examination, it becomes clear that the NSA is indeed breaching the rights of lawful U.S citizens. Through showing that the Fourth Amendment protects the U.S citizens against such actions. Key Words: NSA, Fourth, Amendment, warrant, PRISM, Edward, Snowden. The NSA collects millions of American phone, internet, and personal information. They do this by using a system call PRISM which allows them to collect this data through several different internet websites. However, many believe this is in complete violation of the Fourth Amendment which protects against unwarranted searches and seizures. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from arbitrary governmental intrusions. Private intrusions not acting in the color of governmental authority are exempted from the Fourth Amendment. To have standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment, one must first demonstrate an...
Words: 2486 - Pages: 10
...Search and Seizure in America CJA/364 February 10, 2015 Search and Seizure in America The fourth amendment has given us the protection against unreasonable search and seizure but what exactly does that mean? To understand, one must define right of privacy, search, seizure, arrest, and reasonableness and how each of these relates to stop and frisk, automotive search rules, and requirements regarding border and regulatory searches. Have you ever been stopped on the street or anywhere and frisked by a police officer? Individuals should be aware of the rules regarding such a situation. In the state of New York, the people, "Mayor Michael Bloomberg" (Wells 2013, p. 1) and the district court judge "Shira Scheindlin" (Wells 2013) argued about reforming the stop and frisk policy. The objective issues in improving system addressed after a stop and frisk case won by the arrestee. In the case involving the arrestee "David Ourlicht" (Whitaker, 2013, p. 1) claimed he was wrongfully stopped and frisked. The officer stopped and frisked the defendant because the object in his pocket resembled a gun. The attorney representing the defendant argued his constitutional rights, and the stop and frisk was unconstitutional. The environment of the Missouri cities, counties, suburbs, and rural area are subject to society socialization, private activity, and deviant behavior which may cause the proper authority to respond to the nature of the action the same as in New York City. Society plays...
Words: 1651 - Pages: 7
...Abstract The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects one’s rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. It also states that no warrants shall be issued without probable cause. Probable cause can be defined as a person of reasonable caution who believes that a crime has been committed and the person accused has committed that crime. Modern law has afforded police officers an incentive to respect this amendment, known as the “stop and frisk” act. The Stop and Frisk law allows police officers to stop someone and do a quick search of their outer clothing for weapons: if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that a crime has or is about to take place and the person stopped is armed or dangerous. The reasonable suspicion must be based with specific expressed facts and not on just an officer’s intuition or guess. The Stop and Frisk law balances crime control, protects an individual’s right, and prevents from unreasonable searches. This law is further implemented and proven in the Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio where it was ruled that the search performed was in fact reasonable under the constitution and the fourth amendment. Introduction The Fourth Amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place...
Words: 1450 - Pages: 6
