The Exclusionary Rule Abstract This paper will present the Exclusionary Rule and the original intentions for its enactment. It will discuss the importance of the rule and how it is a protection against an unlawful search and seizure and a violation of the rights provided by the Fourth Amendment. Also‚ this document will display the history of the Exclusionary Rule‚ with its first appearance in the case‚ Boyd v. United States in 1886. Weeks v. United States will show a better-established‚
Premium United States Psychology Education
February 14‚ 2013 HSI-170 A month in a half after 9/11 terrorist attack on the United States‚ the USA Patriot Act passed Congress‚ it ’s also known as the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism” Act‚ or more simply‚ the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was created with the noble intention of finding and prosecuting international terrorists operating on American soil; however‚ the unfortunate consequences of the Act have been
Free United States Constitution
Opinion of Guan Yin SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 11-817 STATE OF FLORIDA‚ Petitioner‚ v. CLAYTON HARRIS‚ Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA Syllabus The case present before us involves the constitutionality of a dog sniff in regards to the 4rth Amendment. The respondent claims that the police
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Amendment requirements. We will also show the definition of Probable Cause and the standards for which it is met. There are seven types of searches that do not require a warrant. We will list these seven types of searches‚ but will discuss only two in full detail. As part of the discussion we will show what the rationale is for allowing warrantless searches‚ and if those reasons are persuasive or not. We will further discuss whether or not Probable Cause must exist in order to obtain a search warrant
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Criminal law United States Constitution
Ashley Peterson Ms. Gibson English 151 May 15‚ 2012 Backscatter Technology: The Debate Revealed On June 24‚ 2010‚ senators Amy Klobuchar and Bob Bennett introduced a bill to the Senate called the “Securing Aircraft From Explosives Responsibility: Advanced Imaging Recognition Act‚” also known as “SAFER AIR Act of 2010” (Taylor 3). The bill aimed to mandate the use of full-body scanners in airports as the primary method of screening by 2013 (Taylor 3). The passing of this bill threw fuel on an already
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
unreasonable searches and seizures and sets out requirements for search warrants based on probable cause as determined by a neutral judge or magistrate I chose this amendment because this protects the Americans from search and seizures without having a probable cause. It is illegal for Law enforcement to come and search your property without probable cause unless they have a warrant. This amendment is to protect the peoples personal property and personal belongings from police to search and seizure without
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
(2009). Policing for Homeland Security. Criminal Justice Police Review 2009 (20)‚ 253. Retrieved from http://cjp.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/content/20/3/253.full.pdf+html The Constitution of the United States. (n.d). Fourth Amendment--Search and Seizure. Retrieved from http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/amdt4.html
Premium Federal Bureau of Investigation Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
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. Terms and Tidbits Unreasonable Regulates government action‚ not action by private citizens. In general‚ search or seizure without a warrant is unreasonable (with some exceptions). If unreasonable
Premium United States Constitution Jury Criminal law
evidence including personal items that may be within or part of a person’s body such as: Ingested drugs Foreign objects Blood Medical implants Concerns over-non testimonial evidence involve Right to privacy issues Body cavity searches Electronic eavesdropping Electronic evidence The USA patriot act of 2001 The patriot act of 2001 made it easier for police investigators to intercept many forms of electronic communication The USA patriot act 2 The provisions of
Premium Criminology Crime Sociology
a warrant in this case‚ Coolidge v. New Hampshire would apply and during the search for the items on the warrant police may also lawfully seize items that are incriminating (Roberson‚ Wallace‚ & Stuckey‚ 2013). This only applies‚ however‚ to searches involving warrants. Legal discovery of evidence without a warrant must involve plain view and must be inadvertent. The marijuana baggie was not in plain view. The suspect/victim was unable to give consent for her effects to be searched. The suspect/victim
Premium Police Criminal law Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution