Violating The Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment is the first line protection against the government and their officials from violating our privacy. The Fourth Amendment provides safeguards to individuals during searches and detentions, and prevents unlawfully seized items from being used as evidence in criminal cases. The degree of protection available in a particular case depends on the nature of the detention or arrest, the characteristics of the place searched, and the circumstances under which the search takes place. This Amendment protects us in the following situations such as being questioned while walking down the street, being pulled over while driving, entering individual’s homes for arrest and searching of evidence while there. In most scenarios, police officer may not search or seize an individual or his or her property unless the officer has a valid search warrant, a valid arrest warrant, or a belief rising to the

Today the Fourth Amendment is very important, because law enforcement cannot do searches and seizures inside a home or an officer observes weird activity which leads the officer to conclude that criminal activity may be afoot, however without a warrant that would be an unreasonable and would be an illegal thing to do ("What Does the Fourth Amendment Mean?"). This amendment helps us feel like we are protected from the law officials when we feel like they have power over us and sometimes us U.S. Citizens feel

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizures. (People v. Williams 20 Cal.4th 125.) A defendant may move to suppress as evidence any tangible or intangible thing obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant. (Penal Code §1538.5(a)(1)(A).) Warrantless searches and seizures are presumptively unreasonable. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th 119; see also Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) 508 U.S. 366 (stating searches and seizures conducted outside the judicial process are per se unreasonable unless subject to an established exception).) While the defendant has the initial burden of raising the warrantless search issue before the court, this burden is satisfied when the defendant asserts the absence of a warrant and makes a prima facie case in support. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th 130.) Accordingly, when the prosecution seeks to introduce evidence seized during a warrantless search, they also bear the burden in showing that an exception to the warrant applies. (Mincey v. Arizona (1978) 98 S.Ct. 2408; see also People v. James (1977) 19 Cal.3d 99.) Evidence obtained as a result of an unlawful search and seizure is considered “fruit of the poisonous tree” and should be suppressed. (Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 371 U.S. 471; see also Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) 508 U.S. 372 (stating unreasonable searches are invalid under Terry and should be suppressed).)

Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures of certain papers, books, documents etc. Rules are not violated in it. There must be probable reason because in order to arrest a particular person without a search warrant. It possesses an oath or affirmation from the government. It has two fundamental rights as Right to privacy and Right to freedom. Search occurs when it has a correct reason that was obligated by the government people. Private individuals are violated from this amendment. A seizure happens the owner must has a right documents with him on his own property, if not the documents is seized and the person gets arrested. Sometimes the property belongs to other possessor but in mistake reasonable person gets involved in the task. The banning of unreasonable searches can violate many things to be happen.

The Constitution of The United States of America was created “in Order to form a more perfect Union.” Our rights, as citizens, are protected by the first ten amendments also known as the Bill of Rights. These amendments were established due to the strong objections of the British rule on the original colonies. Particularly speaking, the fourth amendment has protected our rights from unlawful search and seizures. With the implementation of “Probable Cause” and the vagueness of the Bill of Rights, the rules have been stretched and some say violated.We the people, need to develop the fine line between Probable cause and an unlawful search.

The fourth amendment was created to protect the individual rights form governmental intrusion. The fourth amendment protects the right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. This shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue unless it is upon probable cause. It was established on December 15, 1791 during the colonial era. When the 4th Amendment became part of the Constitution, it was originally only applied to the federal government. Then it was applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The fourth amendment is so important to American, because it is the natural right of the people and the protection from intrusion. Now in society many people do not understand that the

• Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is primarily concentrated in four areas: 1) defining “searches”; 2) the Warrant Requirement, in which warrantless searches are semantically precluded except in specific and tightly constricted situations; 3) the Probable Cause Requirement, whose exclusive provisions are closely associated with the Warrant Requirement’s proscription of police inquiries into same; and, 4) the exclusionary rule, which presumptively excludes any information or evidence gathered in violation of the preceding two (Rickless, 2005).

We all know our rights. Most of us do paid attend, to them in school. Do you know what is the Fourth Amendment is? If, you have forgotten, it is our right to privacy. Or from the Bill of Right “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).” This can be from our homes, people, schools, and our cars. Why is this important to us? What is searches and seizures? What is privacy? What should we know about this amendment? Do we have an expectation

On his website, a Utah DUI Attorney, David Rosenbloom speaks about violations of the Fourth Amendment.  He states that police officers “pay little attention to the fourth amendment… [because] it is not a self-enforcing right, such as the freedom of speech” (Rosenbloom).  In short, if a citizen believes his or her rights were violated and they were illegally searched/things were seized from them, they must “ask a court to examine the case and apply the fourth

1. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S Constitution says, “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.”

If none of these previsions have been taken into account I would have to say that I strongly disagree with the fourth amendment in this current date because we would applying a law that was created so long ago without any concern to how it should be updated.

A case that took place back in 2001 in Florida is a good example of use of the Fourth Amendment in a court case. On a night in July in Florida Anthony Frierson was in his vehicle waiting to turn at a left turn. When the light turned green Frierson made his turn without using his signal and was pulled over by Officer Steven Miller. An important fact to note is that it not illegal to make a turn without your signal in Florida. After Officer Miller pulled Frierson over he obtained Frierson’s driver’s license, and ran his license through a routine warrant check. Upon doing so he came to find out that Frierson had an outstanding warrant out for his arrest, and proceeded to arrest Frierson on the basis of the warrant. Whenever a police officer arrests someone on a traffic stop they conduct a search incident to arrest, once he proceeded to search Frierson’s vehicle he found an illegal firearm in his car and Frierson was later charged for that also. An issue arose that took the case all the way to the Florida Supreme Court. Since Officer Miller conducted an illegal stop Frierson’s defense team wanted the

Although the Constitution gives us this freedom, there are instances when police and government violate it. For instance, a case concerning desecration of the fourth amendment is Mapp V. Ohio. This situation was taken place in Cleveland, Ohio and involved police entering a Citizen named Mapp’s house without a search warrant. The police entered Mapp’s basement because they believed he was involved in sheltering a suspected bomber. At court, Mapp insisted that her fourth amendment rights had been sullied and the high court said evidence was detained unlawfully. Without a search warrant, it could not be used in criminal trials. This case is a perfect example of our rights being dishonored by police. In conclusion, the court modified and

Some people are saying that letting the government go through all your texts, emails, and call are violating the Fourth Amendment. In some cases I do feel that they are but in others I don't. On one side I feel that the government just wants to project the US form another attack like 9/11. But I also feel that you really don't have any secrets from the government because of them going through everything you've sent.

In this case there are a few issues on appeal raised by Sitz. One of the issues was did the checkpoint violate the Fourth Amendment and did it forbid the balancing test. Another issue was that did it actually fail the effectiveness part of the Brown test. Furthermore, the issue of did the sobriety checkpoint which is permitted by the United States Constitution, violate the Michigan State Constitution (supreme.justia.com n.d). There was also issues of did the sobriety checkpoint have a very high or low arrest result or rates because there were questionable deterrent value. Therefore, the lack of this information brought forward question on does the sobriety checkpoints serve a purpose and do they really stop or just simply curb drunk driving. Although, there was the issue of the violation of Fourth Amendment, there was also an issue of did it also violate the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution as well because even though Michigan Constitution affords its citizens greater rights than those provided by the federal constitution (supreme.justia.com n.d).