the Stored Communication Act factored into the constitutionality of more than 27‚000 items of e-mail evidence. In the case of United States v. Warshak‚ the primary issue at hand is the constitutionality of the government’s warrantless seizure of more than twenty-seven thousand e-mails stored on an internet service provider’s server. To answer the constitutionality issue‚ the first focus is on e-mail itself as a form of communication‚ and whether there can be a reasonable expectation of
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Under what is known as the Plain View Doctrine is called a search-related plain view‚ referring to items that are identified by the responding officer who was authorized to specifically search for it. In this particular case‚ the officer was authorized to search for a white‚ 6’0 tall individual who was wearing a black baseball cap‚ black t-shirt‚ and jeans. Even though this description is vague‚ this individual
Premium Police Crime Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
certain person is suspicious of a criminal act he or she should be able to search the individual. People should understand that they have to give up some rights for their own safety. The thought of someone getting away for the mere fact that an authority could not find an adequate legal reason to search; even though there could be doubt enough to catch the criminal should be enough for every innocent individual to consent search upon themselves. The exclusionary rule is not helping the innocent people
Premium Police Exclusionary rule United States Constitution
searches and seizures.” This means that if a government official or police officer wants to search your person or your property‚ he/she cannot do so without a judicial warrant and/or probable cause. · Back during the colonial era‚ King George would often give British soldiers “writs of assistance.” These were extremely broad search warrants that essentially allowed British troops to walk into anyone’s property for any reason without notice. British troops were allowed to search a property
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
individual detains the person and runs his hands lightly over the suspect’s outer garments to determine if the person is carrying a concealed weapon or contraband. One of the most controversial police procedures is the stop and frisk search. This type of limited search occurs when police confront a suspicious person in an effort to prevent a crime from taking place. The police frisk (pat down) the person for weapons and question the person. Stop and frisk was adopted from the English command law by
Premium Police Terry v. Ohio Civil liberties
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures. Modern officials have granted police officers in New York City an incentive to respect the amendment. The Stop and Frisk program employed by the New York Police Department‚ gives police officers the right to initiate a stop of an individual on the street allegedly and do a quick search of their outer clothes for weapons based on if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that a crime has
Premium Search and seizure United States Constitution New York City
Laura Disla English 201 Professor Langrone 04/03/12 Stop and Frisk Stop and frisk is a program that the New York Police Department uses to stop and search anyone who looks suspicious. Police can stop and frisk anyone without a warrant. This topic is causing many controversies because of the excessive numbers of arrest. A disproportionate number of people of color especially African America and Hispanics are unreasonably stopped and searched simply for looking suspicious. They are the one
Premium Police Crime Search and seizure
privacy along with search and seizure restrictions that apply in public schools‚ but‚ the Courts give school officials and police more flexibility to conduct searches in school. In this case and law review you will learn about two different cases where Courts balance a student’s privacy rights against the school’s interest in safety and student discipline. This means that students often have less protection against what they might perceive as unreasonable searches and seizures at school‚ than in
Premium United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
argued that any DNA evidence taken from the scene is compromised and therefore any scientific evidence or expert opinions relating to this would be prejudicial. Another example could be that law enforcement did not procure proper search warrants before a search and seizure; therefore‚ all evidence gathered resulted in an improper discovery and should be excluded since it violates
Premium Law United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
from a judge to use the device. However‚ if it is for a not life threatening emergency like locating a thief or something where someone is not going to die‚ the Police have to get a warrant from a judge. It can be compared to getting a warrant to search
Premium Police United States Constitution Crime