Why Is The Fourth Amendment Important
The fourth Amendment has been an Amendment that has caused some controversy over
the centuries. A fourth Amendment issue that has been persistent is the use of warrants
and when they are necessary. During the prohibition era a certain case, Carroll vs the
United States, federal agents had suspicion to believe he was selling liquor when at that
time the distribution of alcohol was illegal. Federal agents that had been investigating him
have spotted him driving on the highway and decided to pull him over. They searched his
car with reasonable suspicion of the at the time illegal alcohol. They found the alcohol in his
trunk and arrested Carroll. Carroll then argued that consent was not given to search the car
and that the agents …show more content…
Therefore in a final ruling the
Supreme court ruled against Carroll and found him guilty. This case shows how the use of
warrants and when they are necessary can be sometimes controversial when the situations
can differ. A different case, Mapp vs Ohio, shows how the 4th Amendment has been
changed since the colonial times. ¨Cleveland police went to the home of Dollree Mapp in
1957, looking for a suspect in a bombing. The police officers waited outside her house for t
three hours, then broke into the house and presented Mapp with a piece of paper they said
was a warrant. While searching Mapps home, the police discovered several nudedrawings and some
eroitc books. She was convicted of possessing obscene materials, a felony under Ohio
law. The Supreme Court overturned Mappś conviction, holding that the evidence against
her should be excluded because it was the fruit of an illegal search.” This case shows that
the use of warrants has been controversial considering that it was an illegal search and it
was unreasonable search and seizure which the constitution protects us from. The 4th
Amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure. What rights do we
the centuries. A fourth Amendment issue that has been persistent is the use of warrants
and when they are necessary. During the prohibition era a certain case, Carroll vs the
United States, federal agents had suspicion to believe he was selling liquor when at that
time the distribution of alcohol was illegal. Federal agents that had been investigating him
have spotted him driving on the highway and decided to pull him over. They searched his
car with reasonable suspicion of the at the time illegal alcohol. They found the alcohol in his
trunk and arrested Carroll. Carroll then argued that consent was not given to search the car
and that the agents …show more content…
Therefore in a final ruling the
Supreme court ruled against Carroll and found him guilty. This case shows how the use of
warrants and when they are necessary can be sometimes controversial when the situations
can differ. A different case, Mapp vs Ohio, shows how the 4th Amendment has been
changed since the colonial times. ¨Cleveland police went to the home of Dollree Mapp in
1957, looking for a suspect in a bombing. The police officers waited outside her house for t
three hours, then broke into the house and presented Mapp with a piece of paper they said
was a warrant. While searching Mapps home, the police discovered several nudedrawings and some
eroitc books. She was convicted of possessing obscene materials, a felony under Ohio
law. The Supreme Court overturned Mappś conviction, holding that the evidence against
her should be excluded because it was the fruit of an illegal search.” This case shows that
the use of warrants has been controversial considering that it was an illegal search and it
was unreasonable search and seizure which the constitution protects us from. The 4th
Amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure. What rights do we