Search and Seizure Essay

2432 WordsMay 2, 200710 Pages
The constitution has been the back bone of the United States legal system since it was first written and signed by our founding fathers. This document has been the topic of many heat debates and has gone through many changes and interpretations throughout the years. The forth amendment of the constitution is one of the most debated amendments. This is the amendment that covers the area of search and seizure as well as privacy. The fourth amendment states, "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…show more content…
The way the fourth amendment is being followed today is much different then in colonial times and this is due to the fact that it is now tailored to deal with crimes like drugs and terrorism. There are a few cases that are associated with the forth amendment and search and seizure. The cases that are most recognized are Mapp v. Ohio, the Olmstead Case, Terry v. Ohio and Weeks v. United States. These two case look at different aspects of the amendment and help to set the precedents for cases like these. Another act involved with the fourth amendment is the Federal Communications Act. In the case Mapp v. Ohio, the police received a tip that a possible bomber was hiding in the home of Ms. Mapp. The police went to Ms. Mapp's home claimed to have a warrant entered the home and searched the entire home. During the search Mapp struggled with an officer to see the warrant and was placed in handcuffs. The search resulted in the police finding obscene materials; Mapp was then arrested for possession of these. Mapp's lawyer argued that no warrant was produced prior to the search of her home, which meant that the material found could not be used in court against Mapp. This case was taken to the Supreme Court where it received a 6 -3 decision in Mapp's favor. The court stated, "We hold that all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is by the same authority, inadmissible in a state court." With
Open Document