Preview

federalism

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1701 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
federalism
Guide to Understanding the
Rights of the Accused under the Bill of Rights

AMENDMENT IV

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.

Terms and Tidbits
Unreasonable
Regulates government action, not action by private citizens.
In general, search or seizure without a warrant is unreasonable (with some exceptions). If unreasonable, 4th amendment is violated.
Evidence gathered in violation of the 4th amendment is not admissible in a criminal trial, known as the exclusionary rule. Any evidence derived from illegally obtained evidence is inadmissible (fruit of the poisonous tree).
In determining if a search or seizure is reasonable, the individual’s interest in privacy and security are weighed against society’s interest in conducting the search or seizure. (Two-hour surgery to remove a bullet ruled unreasonable; taking blood from DWI suspect ruled reasonable)
Search
Action by government that violates a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy is an illegal search, includes search of property and search of person
Situation with knowing exposure to public is not protected sometimes even if attempts are made to make it private (garbage, open fields abandoned property).
Also guests to home receive protection when they are overnight guests but not when short-term visitors.
Seizure
Substantial interference with possessions or with a person who believes that he or she is not free to leave or terminate encounter,
Usually involves some physical force to body or submission to authority,
Talking to police is not seizure; demand by police to go to station is seizure.
Warrant
Most searches require a warrant based on probable cause issued by a judge that

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Fourth Amendment

    • 1154 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Arizona (1978), the police collected evidence for four days after the suspect’s apprehension and the death of a police officer at the time of the arrest. He was convicted for murder, assault and narcotics offences. However, because they collected the evidence without a warrant, the suspect’s conviction on the murder of the police officer and assault charges was reversed by the Arizona Supreme Court, but upheld the narcotics conviction. This is a prime example of where the Fourth Amendment protects against unlawful searches. Even though the evidence was overwhelming proof that the suspect murdered the police officer, it was the responsibility of the police to do their due diligence to conduct the search legally. Had they obtained the proper warrants, the conviction would have still been upheld and the suspect would have been punished for the crime he…

    • 1154 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    case study

    • 306 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Case Signifance: The 4th amendment prohibits the unlawful search and seizure of resident belonging to citizens of the United States of America.…

    • 306 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution requires that no search or seizure shall be carried out unless a warrant has been issued. The exceptions are: searches with consent, frisks, plain feel/plain view, incident to arrest, automobile exceptions, exigent circumstances and open fields, abandoned property and public place exceptions (Harr, Hess, 2006, p. 219).…

    • 310 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One does not expect to leave their house and have a stranger barge into their home and rummage through their belongings. This is the situation that Petitioner David Fallsbauer found himself in with not a stranger, but a highly esteemed officer of the law, whom unreasonably dissected his possessions. Under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, citizens are protected against the unbridled and unreasonable searches and seizures. One exception is through consent to the search. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 (9th Cir. 1973). Petitioner David Fallsbauer can demonstrate through established case law that the consent his mother gave was ambiguous. Because his mother’s consent was ambiguous, the consent was not…

    • 447 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment, in the absence of probable cause that the…

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    We have already gone over the exclusionary rules associated with unwarranted searches and seizures, now we need to look at warranted searches and seizures. The Fourth Amendment requires that no warrants be issued unless based on probable cause by a sworn Affirmation, this applies to all warrants whether they are for search or seizure. In order to understand the concept behind warrants, we must also understand probable cause. The Supreme Court has defined probable cause as more than mere suspicion. The facts an officer is acting upon must be enough to convince the average person that the suspect committed or is committing the offense being investigated. (Worrall, 2012) In the academy they stressed this as less than beyond a reasonable doubt, but more than a hunch; which leaves a large area in between.…

    • 1090 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Chapter 3 is titled "Basic Underlying Concepts: Privacy, Probable Cause, and Reasonableness." Privacy refers to an American citizen's expectation of privacy. Probable cause is usually needed by law enforcement officers before they can arrest an individual as well as search with or without a warrant. Reasonableness refers to the standard of searches and seizures to be valid under the Fourth Amendment. Katz v. United States (1967) is the case that demonstrated a change in the interpretation of the Fourth Amendment.…

    • 615 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Unit 3 Fourth Amendment

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution requires that no law enforcement official has the right to carry out search or seizure unless a warrant has been first issued by a judge. The exceptions are: searches with consent, frisks, plain feel/plain view, incident to arrest, automobile exceptions, exigent circumstances and open fields, abandoned property and public place exceptions (Harr, Hess, 2006, p. 219). "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." Is what the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution grants to every single US citizen.…

    • 413 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    American Search Case

    • 1270 Words
    • 6 Pages

    It was adopted as a response to the abuse of search warrants in the American Revolution. The debate of the definition of search has been challenged in many cases in the history of the United States and is brought up again in this case. The Supreme Court ruled that a search occurs only when a person expects privacy in the thing search and society beliefves that expectation is reasonable. This was decided in Katz v. United States in 1967. In Katz the Court ruled that a search had occurred when the government wiretapped a telephone booth. Now seizure is the other part of the 4th amendment. A Seizure of propert occurs when there is meaningful interference by the government with an individual's possessory interests. The exclusionary rule also falls under seizure. The exclusionary rule states that voluntary answers to questions given to officers are offered into evidence in a ciminal prosecution. The government may not detain and individual even momentarily without reasonable, objective grounds, with few exceptions. The refusal to listen or answers does not answer these grounds. The invasion on people's privacy is only minimal and is usually only in speical cases. Some of these…

    • 1270 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are many cases of unreasonable search and seizures which exist. For example, if government officials were to go into a man’s house, whom they suspected of dealing Mariana, but didn’t have a good reason to believe so or a warrant, and had taken his illegal Mariana plants then that would be an example of unreasonable search and seizure. Another example of unreasonable search and seizure would be if police officers were to inspect a person’s car at a traffic stop and take belonging inside because they believe they were illegal possessions; this is unreasonable search and seizure because they did not have a good reason to search.…

    • 439 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Americans have many rights; one of them being the right against unreasonable searches and seizures. The fourth amendment of The Bill of Rights says that people have a right to not be hassled or investigated without reason. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” (US Const. amend. X). This means that a person is not allowed to be searched without a just cause to…

    • 882 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The understanding of the Fourth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution and its relevance for searches and seizures is critical for any investigator, and it strikes a balance between individual liberties and the rights of society. Most importantly, the limitation on any search is that the scope must be narrow, if a search is not conducted legally, the evidence obtained is worthless. As a matter of fact, the exclusionary rule established that courts may not accept evidence obtained by unreasonable search and seizure, regardless of its relevance to a case.…

    • 1584 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Fourth Amendment Exceptions

    • 2977 Words
    • 12 Pages

    The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution states that people have the right "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures," but the issue at hand here is whether this also applies to the searches of open fields and of objects in plain view and whether the fourth amendment provides protection over these as well. In order to reaffirm the courts' decision on this matter I will be relating their decisions in the cases of Oliver v. United States (1984), and California v. Greenwood (1988) which deal directly with the question of whether a person can have reasonable expectations of privacy as provided for in the fourth amendment with regards to objects in an open field or in plain view.…

    • 2977 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Supreme Court Decisions

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution 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 to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Fourth Amendment). The text of the Fourth Amendment does not define exactly what “unreasonable search” is. The framers of the constitution left the words “unreasonable search” open in order for the Supreme Court to interpret. Hence, by looking at the text of the Fourth Amendment, the words “unreasonable search” is very ambiguous and it’s the job of the Supreme Court to delineate the ambiguity of the words. In the case Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), Katz was convicted of illegal wagering based on evidence obtained by attaching a small listening and recording device to the exterior of a public telephone booth that he regularly used for wagering calls (Kanovitz, 2010, p.268). The Supreme Court found that Katz’s Fourth Amendment right was violated by declaring,…

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    - human rights and protection to their property and themselves against the search warrant without evidence against them except to prove that when probable cause to determine personally the judge after examination under oath or affirmation the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be taken.…

    • 2333 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays