Cheetum Case Summary
DISCUSSION
Cheetum will probably be able to win his claim that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated and thus his suppression motion should be granted. The Fourth Amendment of 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. U.S. Const. amend. IV
The Fourth Amendment is intended to protect the security a man relies upon when he places himself or his property within a constitutionally protected area, be it his home or his office, …show more content…
These factors are: (1) the employee's relationship to the item seized; (2) whether the item was in the immediate control of the employee when it was seized; and (3) whether the employee took actions to maintain privacy over the item. U.S. v. Anderson, 154 F.3d 1225.
Each of these issues will be discussed below.
a) Cheetum will probably be able to show that he had a personal relationship to the file seized from his credenza.
A court is more apt to find an employee has standing to challenge the seizure of personal items or the search of an area where personal items are stored than the search or seizure of work-related documents or materials; this is true for employees who bring personal possession into the workplace as well. U.S. v. Anderson, 154 F.3d 1231. Cheetum choose to bring his credenza from home into the workplace in order to use it for work and personal related …show more content…
U.S. v. Anderson, 154 F.3d 1232. In the case of Anderson, the defendant made sure to never let his tapes containing what he believed to be child pornography out of his possession. By keeping his on him at all times he was able to exercise more control over the items and maintain a greater expectation of privacy for these items. Cheetum does not satisfy this criteria because of the mere fact that he choose to leave his file containing personal incriminating evidence outside of his immediate control. He choose to leave it unattended in his office while he went out for
Cheetum will probably be able to win his claim that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated and thus his suppression motion should be granted. The Fourth Amendment of 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. U.S. Const. amend. IV
The Fourth Amendment is intended to protect the security a man relies upon when he places himself or his property within a constitutionally protected area, be it his home or his office, …show more content…
These factors are: (1) the employee's relationship to the item seized; (2) whether the item was in the immediate control of the employee when it was seized; and (3) whether the employee took actions to maintain privacy over the item. U.S. v. Anderson, 154 F.3d 1225.
Each of these issues will be discussed below.
a) Cheetum will probably be able to show that he had a personal relationship to the file seized from his credenza.
A court is more apt to find an employee has standing to challenge the seizure of personal items or the search of an area where personal items are stored than the search or seizure of work-related documents or materials; this is true for employees who bring personal possession into the workplace as well. U.S. v. Anderson, 154 F.3d 1231. Cheetum choose to bring his credenza from home into the workplace in order to use it for work and personal related …show more content…
U.S. v. Anderson, 154 F.3d 1232. In the case of Anderson, the defendant made sure to never let his tapes containing what he believed to be child pornography out of his possession. By keeping his on him at all times he was able to exercise more control over the items and maintain a greater expectation of privacy for these items. Cheetum does not satisfy this criteria because of the mere fact that he choose to leave his file containing personal incriminating evidence outside of his immediate control. He choose to leave it unattended in his office while he went out for