Drones in America and How They Infringe on the 4th Amendment and Due Process of the Law
2930 Words12 Pages
Sheneta R. Ervin
Constitutional Law II
Dr. Jeffery Swain
Florida Memorial University
Drones In America And How They Infringe On The Fourth Amendment and Due Process Of The Law
The purpose of this research paper is to show how unmanned aerial vehicles, better known as UAV’s or drones infringe on the Fourth Amendment and Due Process of the law.
The Fourth Amendment states; ” the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable search and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause.
Drones are highly advanced in surveillance and can monitor 65 enemies of the state simultaneously. So how can citizens feel they have the implicit…show more content… The Fourth Amendment provides protection against illegal policing by, barring searches that are “unreasonable” and without the justification of “probable cause.” In relativity, once individuals’ rights have been violated and the evidence is obtained illegally, and trialed at court, The Exclusionary Rule can be applied to assist a Defendant in a criminal case as a remedy for illegal searches that violate the rights set forth in the Fourth Amendment. When applicable, the rule dictates that the evidence illegally obtained must be excluded as evidence under the Fourth Amendment. One important corollary to the Exclusionary Rule is the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine. This rule holds that, in addition to the material uncovered during the illegal search being in admissible, any evidence that is later gathered as an indirect result of the illegal search will also be excluded (Wong,1963).
While the Exclusionary Rule sounds gratifying, assuring that evidence obtained illegally won’t be submitted it also seems to be flawed. Starting with the 2 exceptions of the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine: 1.) If the police had an independent source of knowledge of the evidence aside from the fruits of the illegal search, then the doctrine will not exclude the discovered evidence. 2.) If discovery of the evidence was "inevitable", the