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 other
Premium United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Landmark Racial Profiling Cases Erika J. Shorter University of Maryland University College CJMS 650 9040 Cole and Smith (2007) define racial profiling as‚ “the use of race and ethnicity as clues to criminality.” This term is commonly used to refer to police or other law enforcement officials singling out a person or group of people as “potential suspects” because of their race or ethnicity (p.98). Terry v. Ohio On October 31‚ 1963‚ while on a downtown beat which he had patrolled many times
Premium Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Crime
educational buildings. The response by most school administrators is to conduct individualized searches and seizures of student’s lockers‚ backpacks‚ and cellphones‚ hoping to find drugs and weapons‚ or signs of their use. Without reasonable suspicion to suspect weapons or drugs‚ school officials do not lawfully‚ under the Constitution‚ have the right to conduct such unreasonable searches and/or seizures of student’s belongings. As new court cases arise pertaining to the issue‚ many begin to realize how
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Privacy United States Constitution
Farheen Iqbal Political Science Professor Homer 04/29/2015 Police stopping and Search (A) Every American and immigrant has the constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Unfortunatly‚ The police often has power to stop and search which are suspected to have stolen or had done something that is illegal. It has been obvious policing tool since the government has given more power to them. However it had prevented criminal acts happening as police can stop and search anyone
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Police
put in place to give US citizens protection from corrupt police and government officials. A common Amendment that most Americans don’t realize we have is the Fourth amendment. The Fourth Amendment gives us protection against arbitrary searches and seizures without a proper warrant. It was first used to prevent the use of writs of assistance which is blanket search warrants with which the british custom officials had invaded homes to search for smuggled goods. As the fourth amendment has changed and
Premium United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Police
I. THE FOURTH AMENDMENT SHOULD CONTROL MALICIOUS PROSECUTION CLAIMS INVOLVING PRETRAIL DETENTIONS WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE Years ago this Court instructed that the Fourth Amendment should be used to analyze allegedly unconstitutional “detention[s] of suspects pending trial.” Gerstein v. Pugh‚ 420 U.S. 103‚ 125 n.27 (1975). Since then this Court has reaffirmed that the “detention of criminal suspects” is “governed by the provisions of the Fourth Amendment.” Albright v. Oliver‚ 510 U.S. 266‚ 274 (1994)
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
would protect citizens from a government that would potentially overstep its boundaries. The Fourth Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights as one of the guarantees afforded to all citizens protecting rights to privacy and illegal search and seizure. In today’s society with the new technologies for surveillance‚ the government is able to closely watch its citizens. It is questionable to some whether this is a violation of the fourth amendment. It is necessary to have an amendment in place that
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution states that people have the right "to be secure in their persons‚ houses‚ papers‚ and effects‚ against unreasonable searches and seizures‚" but the issue at hand here is whether this also applies to the searches of open fields and of objects in plain view and whether the fourth amendment provides protection over these as well. In order to reaffirm the courts’ decision on this matter I will be relating their decisions in the cases of Oliver v. United States
Premium United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Searches and seizures
made may properly be seized without a warrant as long as such items are immediately recognizable as subject to seizure (Criminal Procedure: Law and Practice 2004). In other instances police can also seize evidence that is in open fields. The open fields doctrine holds that items in open fields are not protected by the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures‚ so they can properly be taken by an officer without a warrant or probable cause (Criminal Procedure: Law and
Premium Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Searches and seizures
on the legal requirements and circumstances under which it is necessary to obtain a search and seizure warrant before crime scene processing. According to the Fourth Amendment search and seizure requirements‚ a warrant is required any time a reasonable expectation of privacy exists. Therefore‚ in an effort to protect the right of the people and their belongings against unreasonable search and seizures and up hold the law officials accountable for fair treatment and processing procedures. When a
Premium Police Crime Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution