Evolution Of The Fourth Amendment Essay
“Evolution of the Fourth Amendment”
Week Six Assignment
Criminal Law
By Robert Schmitz
10/13/2013
The fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that every person has the right to “be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable search and seizure.”(Brooks). However, this right was not always protected in court, criminal defendants would have to sit and watch as evidence was still admissible even if it had been seized with no warrant. Our right to privacy is granted by the fourth amendment, and its garauntee’s are still fuzzy to this day, as the evolution of the fourth amendment is not yet over. This right was intended to garauntee our privacy, however, the phrase “unreasonable search” is increasingly interpreted in many ways, causing confusion on what rights are garaunteed and those that are not. In Weeks v. United States, the Supreme Court …show more content…
Ohio, courts relied on the warrant rule, where police needed a search warrant prior to search or seizure. Due to certain grievances courts had with the application of the exclusionary rule, the courts reinterpreted the fourth amendment, making the governments powers to search and seizure more broad. There are a few exceptions to the rule where an officer must have a warrant before search and seizure, the first is exigent circumstances. Exigent circumstances exist when there is a situation that requires immediate action, and when probable cause to search exists and officers reasonably believe evidence may be destroyed or removed before a search warrant could be obtained. Another exception is a search incident to arrest, where a search without a warrant can be performed incedent to a lawful arrest. Vehicle searches, consent searches, and searches known as “open field’ searches are all examples of exceptions to the warrant
Week Six Assignment
Criminal Law
By Robert Schmitz
10/13/2013
The fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that every person has the right to “be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable search and seizure.”(Brooks). However, this right was not always protected in court, criminal defendants would have to sit and watch as evidence was still admissible even if it had been seized with no warrant. Our right to privacy is granted by the fourth amendment, and its garauntee’s are still fuzzy to this day, as the evolution of the fourth amendment is not yet over. This right was intended to garauntee our privacy, however, the phrase “unreasonable search” is increasingly interpreted in many ways, causing confusion on what rights are garaunteed and those that are not. In Weeks v. United States, the Supreme Court …show more content…
Ohio, courts relied on the warrant rule, where police needed a search warrant prior to search or seizure. Due to certain grievances courts had with the application of the exclusionary rule, the courts reinterpreted the fourth amendment, making the governments powers to search and seizure more broad. There are a few exceptions to the rule where an officer must have a warrant before search and seizure, the first is exigent circumstances. Exigent circumstances exist when there is a situation that requires immediate action, and when probable cause to search exists and officers reasonably believe evidence may be destroyed or removed before a search warrant could be obtained. Another exception is a search incident to arrest, where a search without a warrant can be performed incedent to a lawful arrest. Vehicle searches, consent searches, and searches known as “open field’ searches are all examples of exceptions to the warrant