Respect 4th Amendment

However, if exigent circumstances justify the initial entry into a dwelling to aid an individual in distress, further searching of the residence is not permitted once the crisis is contained without retrieving a search warrant. Additionally, emergency doctrine does not apply to a murder scene unless the officer is providing immediate aid, search for other victims or a killer. For example, in the case of Michael Fred Wehrenberg v. The State of Texas, Wehrenberg’s motion to suppress evidence that was obtained on a warrantless search was suppressed. Parker County police had been conducting surveillance of a residence located at 501 Center Point Road for 30 days when a confidential informant notified investigators that individuals inside the residence were “fixing to” cook methamphetamine. Within hours, investigators entered the residence without a search warrant. During the event, several individuals, including Wehrenberg, were removed from the home while a protective sweep of the home was conducted by law-enforcement

The forceful entry into Jasper Scump’s residence, search of his person and car without a warrant violated his fourth amendment rights to be secure in his persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The police had a search warrant for the premises for weapons and evidence of gang activity. During her detainment, the police officers questioned Mena about her citizenship status. The district court sided with Mena and the Ninth Circuit court upheld the D.C.’s decision. The courts stated that detaining Mena in handcuffs throughout the search had infringed upon her Fourth Amendment rights, as well as questioning her citizenship.

In these situations, they did not use a warrant but inferred that they were hiding something. In this dilemma, these actions were probably the right thing to do because if they had to get a warrant, they would hide from them. One thing they could've done to not violate the 4th Amendment was hold them in custody until they could go on trial.

The 4th amendment protects the citizens of the U.S. rights against unlawful search and seizure. This includes building a database of information that can be retrieved at any time for any reason just for the sake of collecting information. This gives the government access to personal information without the need of a warrant, just to “look into” someone’s life. If this is okay for the government to do, what is next? Personalized RFID tags for every individual who comes into the US? This would allow the government to secure the country by knowing where every individual is located in the country. Where is invading others privacy okay for the sake of securing the country from

This project has to do with the 4th amendment. The 4th amendment has to do with unreasonable search and seizure of a person or his belongings such as house or car without probable cause or a warrant.

The Fourth Amendment allows U.S. citizen to feel secure. And that security is not going to change because the fourth amendment is “set in stone” (salon.com, 2013). Obama did speak on the security of phone calls and he said the government looks at the duration phone calls and their numbers. However, he did go on to say “This program, by the way, is fully overseen not just by Congress, but by the FISA Court, a court specially put together to evaluate classified programs to make sure that the executive branch, or government generally, is not abusing them and that they’re — it’s being out consistent with the Constitution and rule of law” (www.fednews.com). The Judicial Oversight on the information that the government receives allows citizens to

There are obvious and assuring reasons that the fourth amendment protects American citizens’ rights. Apple, a well-known technology company, recently stated that they consider it their responsibility to provide their customers with the best privacy that they can provide. Apple is currently fighting a lawsuit that demands them to create and application to break the encryption that apple created for privacy and protection. Apple also claims that a small fraction of request they receive seek personal information related to some of Apple’s default apps, such as itunes, iCloud, etc. Apple logs all request that the government asks for pertaining to identifying information such as photos and email. Also, President Obama said while remarking to the

The fundamental purpose of the Fourth Amendment in the United States Constitution is to protect every citizen’s right from unreasonable searches and seizures. The Bill of Rights composed of the first 10 amendments states the limits of governmental authority. For instance, the First Amendment guarantees individuals’ natural rights such as freedom of speech, religion, and press. In addition, the Fourth Amendment restricts government intrusions into personal privacy and property.

Unreasonable, warrantless searches and seizures should not take place because it violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S Constitution by depriving the right to privacy. A search is when an individual's privacy is violated; the privacy of an individual is violated by a Government employee or agent. When a search occurs, a warrant must be present or the privacy of the individual is deprived; one’s privacy is also deprived when a warrantless seizure occurs. The seizure of property is when the government takes possession of an individual's property. Warrantless seizures of property are mostly prohibited, unless there are justifiable expectations. The Wall Street Journal stated, "you can’t have a hundred percent security and then have a hundred

Question one. 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…” Just imagine a scenario where an individual is sitting in their house, and the police barge in and search the entire premises and the individual with no warrant or merit to the search? That type of life would be perverse on itself, let alone frightening. Cases like Katz, Jones, and Oliver exemplify why the Fourth Amendment is so important to our everyday lives and wellbeing.

The Fourth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights which was established in the seventeenth and eighteenth century English common law. Aside from the rest of the amendments in the Bill of Rights the Fourth Amendment can be traced back to a strong public reaction from some cases back in the 1760s. Two of these cases happened in England and one case happened in the colonies. These cases involved some pamphleteers who would pass out pamphlets to the public in order to spread their word around. These pamphlets however ridiculed the king and his ministers. After finding this out the king issued warrants to have the pamphleteer’s homes ransacked and stripped of all their books and papers. Even back then the pamphleteers knew that their rights

The Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791. This Amendment protects people from the police searching their homes and private property without a properly executed search warrant. "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" ("Annenberg Classroom," 2006).

It is vital for law enforcement to determine whether a search warrant, arrest warrant, or both is needed. When an arrest is to take place within a dwelling where reasonable privacy is expected, law enforcement must determine whether or not the prospective arrestee lives there. If the person to be arrested lives there, only an arrest warrant is needed. If the dwelling belongs to a third party, an arrest warrant and a search warrant is necessary. In order to comply with the Fourth Amendment’s protection of privacy, police must secure the appropriate warrant(s) and knock and announce their presence.

The Fourth Amendment was created in the year of 1791, and it protected people from unwarranted investigations. “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,” (Fourth Amendment). The Fourth Amendment protects people, but that does not mean people will not violate it. When evaluating the information about the Fourth Amendment, one can interpret about how it has a prolonged and fascinating history, such as the past implications of the it, modern cases about it, and its current effectiveness.