Essay On Search And Seizure
Search and Seizure, Arrest and Interrogation
Search and Seizure The Fourth Amendment protects the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, appears, 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 Fourth amendment is a critical aspect to policing due to the fact that it structures how police are to investigate crimes and suspects. In order to conduct a proper search an officer but have probable cause as to why they must search the suspects body, home or vehicle. Probable cause is the requirement found in the …show more content…
Probable cause is usually found when there is reasonable belief that a crime has been committed which would lead to an arrest or when the evidence of a crime is presented in a place to be searched. Some circumstances may include that probable cause will justify a warrantless search or seizure. But under these circumstances the persons arrested without a warrant are to be brought before authority after the arrest for judicial determination of probable cause. The courts defined probable cause in Draper v. United States as probable cause being more than a suspicion, requiring the existence of facts that would lead a person of reasonable caution to believe that a crime has been committed, yet not requiring proof of guilt. Probable cause may often result from information received from reliable sources such as informants, victims, witnesses or any other independent source. However …show more content…
During an interrogation the suspect does not have the right to leave, but before the police officers interrogate the suspect they must first inform the individual of his or her rights. Officers often read the individual their Miranda rights, but the rights are to be read prior to an interrogation. Miranda v. Arizona came out in 1963, when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix Arizona on charges of rape and kidnapping. After being interrogated for two hours without being advised of his rights, the officers then got a written confession from Mr. Miranda. The Supreme Court then had the conviction overturned due to the fact the Miranda’s rights had been violated prior to the confession. The basis of the Miranda rights is that coerced confessions are unconstitutional and there might be a chance that they are not true. TO avoid these types of confessions officers are encouraged to follow specific steps prior to an interrogation. Police must explain to each suspect the right they have to not incriminate themselves under the Fifth Amendment, as well as the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment. Even though many of these suspects will waive their rights and comply with the officers they must be knowing and it must be voluntary. If the suspects request to have a lawyer present the officers must then stop questioning the suspect until there is
Search and Seizure The Fourth Amendment protects the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, appears, 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 Fourth amendment is a critical aspect to policing due to the fact that it structures how police are to investigate crimes and suspects. In order to conduct a proper search an officer but have probable cause as to why they must search the suspects body, home or vehicle. Probable cause is the requirement found in the …show more content…
Probable cause is usually found when there is reasonable belief that a crime has been committed which would lead to an arrest or when the evidence of a crime is presented in a place to be searched. Some circumstances may include that probable cause will justify a warrantless search or seizure. But under these circumstances the persons arrested without a warrant are to be brought before authority after the arrest for judicial determination of probable cause. The courts defined probable cause in Draper v. United States as probable cause being more than a suspicion, requiring the existence of facts that would lead a person of reasonable caution to believe that a crime has been committed, yet not requiring proof of guilt. Probable cause may often result from information received from reliable sources such as informants, victims, witnesses or any other independent source. However …show more content…
During an interrogation the suspect does not have the right to leave, but before the police officers interrogate the suspect they must first inform the individual of his or her rights. Officers often read the individual their Miranda rights, but the rights are to be read prior to an interrogation. Miranda v. Arizona came out in 1963, when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix Arizona on charges of rape and kidnapping. After being interrogated for two hours without being advised of his rights, the officers then got a written confession from Mr. Miranda. The Supreme Court then had the conviction overturned due to the fact the Miranda’s rights had been violated prior to the confession. The basis of the Miranda rights is that coerced confessions are unconstitutional and there might be a chance that they are not true. TO avoid these types of confessions officers are encouraged to follow specific steps prior to an interrogation. Police must explain to each suspect the right they have to not incriminate themselves under the Fifth Amendment, as well as the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment. Even though many of these suspects will waive their rights and comply with the officers they must be knowing and it must be voluntary. If the suspects request to have a lawyer present the officers must then stop questioning the suspect until there is