Preview

The Fourth Amendment

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2793 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Fourth Amendment
Abstract
This paper will investigate the fourth amendment, unlawful search and seizure, and will explain what is considered to be unlawful and what is not. This paper will also discuss the right of privacy that Americans are entitled to as citizens of the United States. Events that have marked history in regards to the fourth amendment will also be explored, explaining the nature of searches and the key components that coincide. The court ruling in the historic case of Arizona vs. Gant will be explored in detail. This court case set out to establish what was actually considered unlawful, and what guidelines must be followed to be considered lawful. The case suggests that because of probable case that a search would then in fact be lawful. But in this case it is discussed that even when probable cause is present, there is still factors that must be considered.

Unlawful Search and Seizure Imagine being pulled over while driving on a suspended license; you are handcuffed, and placed in the backseat of a squad car, while the officer searches your car, without your consent. There you are sweating profusely, nervous of what may and will be found, and then it is found, in the glove box a gun and drugs. What should be said in defense? What should be done? Was this in fact a situation where unlawful search and seizure had taken place? Did this go against your constitutional rights as a citizen? There was no consent, but there was probable cause because of the suspended license. Imagine driving with friends and you are speeding. You are then pulled over, the officer smells marijuana, and arrest everyone inside of the vehicle. He then returns to the vehicle, and searches it finding cocaine in a jacket coat pocket. Was this too an act of unlawful search and seizure? Did this go against your reasonable expectation of privacy?
The Bill of Rights
Many of us may struggle when it comes to knowledge about laws, and our constitutional rights as



References: Arizona v. Gant. (2009). Retrieved November 22, 2012, from http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/07-542/ Calsyn, J. D., Hale, B. C., Kranz, H., Grossman, M. R., & Kim, N. E. (1998). Warrantless searches and seizures. Georgetown Law Journal, 86, 1214-1288. Cole, G.F., & Smith C. E., (2011) Criminal Justice (6th ed.). Belmont, California: Wadsworth. Josephson, M. (1996). Fourth amendment--must police knock and announce themselves before e.g. Microsoft Corporation (1995-2012). The Fourth Amendment [U.S. Constitution]. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f081.htm. (2012). The Fourth Amendment "Reasonable" Requirement. [ONLINE] Available at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/the-fourth-amendment-reasonableness-requirement.html. Understanding Search and Seizure Law. (2009). Retrieved November 22, 2012, from http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/search-seizure-criminal-law-30183.html U.S. Supreme Court: Arizona v. Gant [Article]. (2009, May 04). The Daily Record. Baltimore, Maryland.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Facts: This case raises questions concerning the Fourth Amendment and searches incident to a lawful arrest. On September 13th, 1965, three police officers arrived at Chimel’s residence in Santa Ana, California. They possessed a search warrant, which authorized Chimel’s…

    • 211 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Arizona v. Gant (2009) SCOTUS rule held that the Belton rule was revised as the justices stated that it did not give authority for the police officers to search an arrestee’s vehicle if the occupant had been arrested and therefore could not access the interior of the car. This implies that the police should only search the arrestee and places that could be reached. Gant could no longer reach the interior of his car, and there was no reasonable ground to suppose that a search would produce evidence to support the offense of driving on a suspended license. Gant v. Arizona established that a search of a vehicle after an arrest is permissible when the arrestee is not confined, and the passenger compartment is within their immediate reach.…

    • 296 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    This work POL 303 Week 2 Discussion Questions 1 4th Amendment comprises solution of the following task: "What rights are protected by the 4th Amendment? Provide three concrete examples. Why are unreasonable searches forbidden? What factors determine whether a search is reasonable or not? Explain in 200…

    • 641 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    4th Amendment Case Study

    • 704 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Explain the two-fold requirement discussed in Katz v. United States, for analyzing when a search occurs under the 4th Amendment.…

    • 704 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    This comment analyzes the history of the Fourth Amendment and the evolution of the private search doctrine. Specifically, it takes the reader through a history of the Fourth Amendment and the inception of the private search doctrine into how the Fourth Amendment is being upheld in today’s technology-driven world. In detail, this comment seeks to expand upon the defendant’s home presumption argument that the Sixth Circuit in United States v. Lichtenberger did not address.…

    • 74 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Sometimes I feel as though some officers take it for far and do things that they shouldn't. If someone knows what's wrong and right they would know better than to go out and do something dumb. I feel as though the stop and frisk is something can be helpful to people everywhere. If someone knows they aren't doing anything wrong or have any weapons on them then there should not be a problem. They should go along with the officer and do whatever is asked and there will not be a problem. It becomes a problem when people do not cooperate and want to start fighting back. Officers are just trying to do their job and protect everyone. Sometimes they can be wrong about who they stop but at least know that person knows what they were doing is suspicious and not good to do around. The case took long to process because it was hard trying to figure out if the officer had the right to seize the weapon. In order to search someone you have to have probable cause. The court then denied the motion to suppress and Terry and Chilton pleaded not guilty. The judge then determined that they were…

    • 1005 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Patriot Act

    • 14268 Words
    • 58 Pages

    an education on the Bill of Rights." The Village Voice (New York) 25 Apr. 2007. Lexis…

    • 14268 Words
    • 58 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Fourth Amendment protects three distinct rights. They are liberty, property and privacy. Taking into consideration along with research and survey, I believe that each of these rights are equally important. Together they provide for a complete and well-rounded way of life. Without liberty, our lives would be limited to what the establishment would allow and therefore, what privacy could we have without the right of choice. Property would have no value without the liberty to use it as I desire.…

    • 187 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    In Wyoming v. Houghton (1999) impacted law enforcement procedure by its ruling states that law enforcement officer have a right to search a passenger’s personal possession, only if the law enforcement officer could present probable cause or the officer could prove contrabands and illegal activity . The automobile exception is recognized under the 4th Amendment to eliminate the requirements for search warrant of automobiles when there is probable cause established that contraband was located in the vehicle and illegal activities were involved (Chase, 1999, p.71). This paper will examine Wyoming v. Houghton case and the impact on law enforcement procedures in relate to Wyoming Supreme Court wrongful ruling. It will also examine two journals related to how Wyoming’s ruling effected probable cause standards.…

    • 2555 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    What most people have gone without knowing is unreasonable searches and seizures go as far back as 1604 English times. Sir Edward Coke was the first to bring this matter to light among people of this time. He said that, “The house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress , as well for his defense against injury and violence as for his repose” (The History Behind the 4th Amendment). During the colonial era the King of England looked…

    • 2068 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    4th Amendment rights

    • 408 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Individual rights under the Fourth Amendment can make or break a case in trial. According to the Fourth Amendment, “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.” This is a United States citizens Fourth Amendment right equally protected to all. This protects the people from the State and Federal Governments within their privacy. The Fourth Amendment also advises that a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) must have probable cause before seeking a warrant. Probable cause is when there are enough facts, or totality of the circumstances, that a crime has happened. The LEO if seeking for a search warrant must state in the warrant what it is they will be searching for. For example, if an LEO seeks a search warrant for stolen property; the LEO must only check items in the house which could be stolen; i.e. televisions, computers, vehicles etc. The LEO checking a thumb drive, not putting on the warrant to check that equipment, which contains child pornography, would be an illegal search and seizure. Unfortunately, the defendant in this situation would have the evidence suppressed due to the illegal search.…

    • 408 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Right to Confront

    • 2014 Words
    • 9 Pages

    "Maryland v. Craig, U.S. Supreme Court Case Summary & Oral Argument." The Oyez Project | U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument Recordings, Case Abstracts and More. Web. 29 Nov. 2010. .…

    • 2014 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Fifth Amendment

    • 494 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In 1966, there was a supreme case called Miranda v. Arizona which the Supreme Court ruled that the fifth amendment privilege againest self incrimination requires law enforcement to advise a suspect that before a custodial interrigation, a suspect must be informed of both his or her privileges against incriminating oneself and to obtain an attorney. Miranda warnings must be given before any questioning by law enforcement officials.…

    • 494 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Shock Incarceration

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages

    3. Miranda v. Arizona: Certiorari to The Supreme Court of Arizona. (1966). United States Supreme Court. Retrieved April 23, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Miranda/…

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Patriot Act

    • 1920 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The longstanding practice under the Fourth Amendment of serving a warrant prior to executing a search could be easily avoided in virtually every case, because the government would simply have to show that it has 'reasonable cause to believe ' that providing notice 'may ' 'seriously jeopardize an investigation. ' This is a significant infringement on personal liberty. (2001)…

    • 1920 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays