Importance Of Search And Seizure In Criminal Investigations

Abstract

Searches of fire scenes are common in operations of the fire service and important to the investigation of fire origin and cause. Fire and arson investigators need to be aware of search and seizure laws. There have been several court decisions and laws created regarding proper search and seizure procedures for fire and arson investigators. Research into these laws and court rulings will help fire and arson investigators understand what type of search warrant is required, if search warrants can be obtained, and who can obtain a search warrant.

Search Warrants for the Fire and Arson Investigator The Illinois Fire Investigation Act (1992) stipulates that every fire department chief has the responsibility
During emergencies where the fire department has been called to perform suppression duties, the Emergency Doctrine permits the search of a premise without a warrant if the search is conducted in a reasonable time period and conducted to determine origin and cause. After such a time, search warrants are needed, and any evidence or information gathered during a search without a warrant will not be upheld by a court (Burnett). Exigency for emergency services can be defined as the need for fire and police to act in an emergency to make an area continually safe. Without exigency, the only ways to perform a legal search is through consent, or obtaining an administrative or criminal search warrant. A problem that exists in the fire service for fire and arson investigators is to establish when a search warrant is needed, as well as, their ability to obtain such a warrant in the absence of police department assistance (Berlin,
Tyler case is important for establishing warrantless searches as part of the initial investigation, and that factors from the fire itself inhibited the investigation, continuing the original exigency. The question that it did raise, however, is the definition of “reasonable” as it relates to the investigator to perform warrantless searches. Michigan V. Clifford (1984) ruled that the investigators were prohibited from performing the investigation of a house fire for personal reasons, and the fire scene was remanded into custody of the homeowner after extinguishment. As such, a search warrant was needed to gain lawful entry into the home, and the evidence that was obtained was not allowed to be used in court. The investigators in this instance should have obtained an administrative search warrant. In the absence of exigency, consent to search would be needed to lawfully search a premise without a warrant. This instance could arise when a fire investigator is unable to conduct an investigation in a “reasonable” amount of time. To obtain such a warrant, it is recommended the investigator get the consent in writing from the proper owner to prevent any question of consent being granted. It should also be noted that the consent must not be coerced, it is not continuous, and may be revoked at any time