Warrantless Searches

A search warrant is a request marked by a judge that approves cops to hunt down specific articles or materials at a pointed out area and time. Cops get warrants by giving a judge or magistrate with data that the officers have assembled. Generally, the police give the data as composed explanations under pledge, called affidavits, which report either their own particular perceptions or those of private subjects or police covert sources. A judge who accepts that a testimony makes "reasonable justification" to lead a search will issue a warrant. The Affidavits need to build more than a suspicion that criminal action is a foot, however it doesn't need to show verification past a sensible uncertainty. An application for a warrant must have support

No one should be searched without a good reason and warrant. People should have the right of privacy- it is important to them. It is ethical for police to have search warrants before searching a person’s personal belongings. There have been recent conflicts on police powers over the pass years. Police are disobeying the fourth amendment by searching illegally. Critics frown upon police, while supporters agree with the police. Being searched without a permit is unconstitutional, and police could take advantage of their power, and abuse it. It makes US citizens feel less secure and safe. Citizens need to be guaranteed rights as long as they behave.

Finally, consent search very supportive to police officer when they get consent to search the person property because instead of having the police officer getting warrant they can just search specific place for instances like a truck of a vehicle. For example, Strauss, Rebecca. Author of “We can do this the Easy Way Or the Hard Way: The use of Deceit to Induce Consent Searches." States, “Once the owner agrees to the search, the police have received consent to search any area in his home where they reasonably may find evidence of the crime they claimed to be investigating. Consent search is like general warrant fails to meet the fourth amendment particularity requirement because it to general. Strauss, Rebecca also states, “Like general warrants,

One of the main powers law enforcement officers carry is the authority to make citizens involuntarily give up their rights. Most people when confronted by police get mild to moderate panic reaction, can become nervous or anxious, and do as much as possible to limit the time spent with the officer. Due to the difference in power between a citizen and a police officer, citizens often unknowingly, give up their constitutional rights when an officer acts tough or bullies them (Guidelines?1).

The balance of civil liberties and law enforcement is a heated subject that has been in existence arguably since the inception of the United States (U.S.) Constitution. The primary protections granted to U.S. citizens from law enforcement can be found in Amendments II (2) and IV (4) of the Constitution. Amendment II outlines the rights of citizens to bear arms with the language allowing room for interpretation, for example a citizen’s potential right to defend themselves from other citizens and/or the government. Amendment IV places restrictions on police and their ability to conduct investigations, stating the need for a court-issued warrant to perform search and seizure of persons and/or property. Other Amendments place restrictions on the court and corrections branches of the

Under the fourth amendment, each individual in the United States is protected against unreasonable search as seizures. However, if there is probable cause law enforcement can perform a warrantless search without a warrant. Some examples in which law enforcement perform warrantless searches include: consent to search, plain view, and extreme emergency purposes. Under the fourth amendment, law enforcement can perform a warrantless search under these conditions. The reason law enforcement can perform a warrantless search based on consent is because an individual has given them the right to search their property. Therefore, anything that an officer find can be used in court. In the Schneckloth v. Bustamante 1973 case, the U.S. Supreme Court held

When they search without a warrant they could do a voluntary search in which you freely give them permission to go ahead and conduct the search and you can‘t be tricked or coerced into giving the consent. The police can conduct various types of searches such as when you are being arrested the police have the right to go ahead and conduct a search of your immediate areas some people say it can only go as far as the wingspan on your arms but others beg to differ. Another is the inventory search in which they go through all your stuff to make a list of all the items you have that

When a warrantless search takes place due to exigent circumstances, an emergency situation must have taken place. Although all states permit a warrantless search in exigent circumstances, many courts have struggled to define exactly what constitutes an emergency. A warrantless entry by law-enforcement officials are most commonly found to be legal when there is a compelling need for official action and no time to get a warrant (Swanson, 2011 Pg. 24). For example, in a case where an individual is awaiting trail on drug charges where the physical evidence was collected on a search without a warrant, law-enforcement could argue that they entered the premises under exigent circumstances if they felt that their entry was pressing in order to prevent

In some cases there are times when a search needs to be done and there is no time to gain a search warrant, in cases like this is when there are exigent circumstances. Exigent circumstances means that an officer has probable cause, but no sufficient time to acquire a warrant. There are other cases where individuals consent to a search therefore not requiring the officer to secure a warrant. Other examples would be in plane-view searches, automobile searches, and open-field search. Each of these searches do not require a warrant, although in some it is better to cover all bases by obtaining a warrant, but one is not

There are times when police can perform a search without a warrant, and most searches actually do occur without warrants being issued. That is not to say the police can barge into your home and search it without a warrant; if there is a reasonable expectation of privacy and there is not probable cause, a search warrant is required. However, if probable cause does occur, such as the suspect runs away, a gunshot is heard from another room in a home, or even when an individual makes a sudden movement, a search becomes legal without a warrant. Even with a reasonable expectation of privacy, the police can legally conduct a search without a warrant in situations in which certain exemptions

Envision you are at a party where you have not been before and there are people drinking and using drugs. The music is loud and things are getting intense hallucinations. The police arrive at the house where the party is at due multiple calls about drugs and minors. They want to search the house and take a look around but you know there are drugs here and alcohol plus minors. Would it be okay if the police search the house without a warrant? Is this legal or illegal in this situation? I believe that under viable circumstances search and seizure is ethical because it protects citizens from an unlawful entry and provides protection for law enforcement in case a person is dangerous and provides evidence to use in criminal

The police do not always have to have a warrant to conduct a search or arrest. If the police officer has reasonable suspicion that a crime is taking place they can arrest the suspect. However, they need substantial visual evidence to conduct a search or an arrest. As well if the suspect gives the officer consent they can search the suspect. Warrant is also not needed if the illegal possession is in plane sight, in this case the police officer can use the evidence in court and to arrest the suspect. A police officer does not always need probable cause to make an arrest. Based on Terry Vs Ohio the idea of stop and frisk was put place. In this case a off duty police officer noticed these men wanted to possibly hold up a store and were acting

Desperate times call for desperate measures, or at least measures that will sometimes go against the norms. The idea of balancing security and individual liberty is a false one, in my opinion. I believe this because we have no control over terrorism and terrorists, we can make sure everyone is enjoying their individual privacy rights granted under the United States Constitution, but we cannot assure security from terrorists and their attacks. It is difficult to balance two different issues when we do not have control of both of them, to do this we must first win the fight against terrorism, and then focus on balancing security and liberty.

Warrantless arrest are those arrest that are made when probable cause exist, arrest of this sort occurs normally when crimes are committed in the presence of la enforcement officer, or when an officer(s) has reason to believe that a suspect committed a felony in or out of he officer’s presence. Some examples of warrantless arrest made while investigating violations of the Family Violence Act, Failure to Appear in court proceeding, and violations of state traffic laws. Arrest warrants are issued when: there is a suspect inside a private residence and there is no immediate reason for arrest, a crime reported by a citizen for murder, assault, looting, and instances where a criminal offense is not perpetrated in the bearing of a Police Officer.

An individual has the right to not allow police officers into their house without a proper search warrant; however, if you give consent to the officers, thus, a search warrant is not needed.