The Fourth Amendment: Search and Seizure
The Fourth Amendment search and seizure is mainly about privacy, and has been implemented to protect against unreasonable searches and seizures by State, or Federal law enforcement authorities. This amendment has been changed many times to suit the needs of the people. Some of those are searching cars, mobile homes, trash and searches that are conducted by consent. The other aspect that is covered in the Fourth Amendment is on search warrants. The Fourth Amendment states that: 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 (Kaci 221). The Fourth Amendment can be broken down into three sections, first is to provide protection for a person, his home and belongings, second, to prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures, and thirdly, warrants must be based on probably cause and specifically described as to what must be seized. The Fourth Amendment applies to a search only if a person has a "legitimate expectation of privacy" in the place or thing sea
After his motion to suppress the evidence discovered in the motor home was denied, respondent was convicted in California Superior Court on a plea of nolo contendere. I am not saying that we should take away rights because I know that I would not want my rights infringed upon. He told them that he had received marijuana in return for allowing respondent sexual contacts. The California Court of Appeal affirmed. A few Supreme Court cases to look at in order to find relevant topics are: California vs. If these two questions are answered yes, then the last question to be answered is if the search was reasonable or unreasonable. At the agents' request, the youth returned to the motor home and knocked on the door; respondent stepped out. The Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment was not violated because the search was conducted in a public airway about the Ciraolo's home. Without a warrant or consent, one agent then entered the motor home and observed marijuana. Some of the cases involve aircraft surveillance, a motor home, and a person's trash. Acting on information indicating that respondent Greenwood might be engaged in narcotics trafficking, police twice obtained from his regular trash collector garbage bags left on the curb in front of his house. The California Supreme Court reversed, holding that the search of the motor home was unreasonable and that the motor vehicle exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment was not violated because the vehicle being used was not stationary, and the DEA agents had enough evidence to create probable cause.
Common topics in this essay:
Fourth Amendment,
Clara Cal,
San Diego,
Supreme Court,
Administration DEA,
California Constitution,
People Krivda,
fourth amendment,
Ciraolo California,
Superior Court,
motor home,
california vs,
unreasonable searches seizures,
searches seizures,
unreasonable searches,
search warrant,
Court Appeal,
probably cause,
trash searches,
supreme court,
vs ciraolo california,
police officer,
ciraolo california vs,
california vs ciraolo,
california vs carney,
|
Acceptance Essays
