Assignment 1: Warrantless Search

386 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: Stop and frisk used by law enforcement

Question 1: Warrantless searches

Investigators collecting digital evidence can conduct the following forms of warrantless searches:
• Consent search-the suspect willingly consent to the search
• Stop and frisk-allowed law enforcement officers to stop and search a person suspected of digital-related weapons based on reasonable suspicion (Pollitt, 2002)
• Plain view- allows the police to take away and destroy the weapon
• Searches by private citizens- allows some members of the public to collect critical evidence, which is then passed to the law enforcement agencies
• Boarder searches-make it easy for the police to search contrabands.
• Search incident to arrest-allows the police to seize the item but cannot access the content or should not

Show More
Related

  • arizona v. grant

    599 Words  | 2 Pages

    The issue that this case raises, is whether or not the officers had the right to search the car of a person who they just arrested, while the person is handcuffed and placed in the back of a squad car?

    Read More

  • Justice Harlan's Reasonable Expectation Test In Katz Vs. United States

    1009 Words  | 3 Pages

    A warranted search is per say reasonable. Officers may then employ various reasonable means of obtaining the information, e.g. search the content of U.S. mail, one’s house or office, or deploy an undercover agent as in Lewis v. United States (1966). They may, without need for physical intrusion as under the archaic trespass doctrine, utilize modern surveillance methods, such as electronic eavesdropping as in Lopez v. United States (1963) or heat signatures. (Solove and Schwartz 83) Under the third party doctrine, officers may obtain information that you voluntarily provide to your bank, accountant, ISP or e-mail provider as per United States v. Forrester (2008). (Ibid 197; 199) Conversely, “a warrantless search is generally considered to be per se unreasonable.” (Ibid 99) As noted in Katz v. United States (1967), “‘the mandate of the [Fourth] Amendment requires adherence to judicial processes,’ and that searches conducted outside the judicial process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate, are per se unreasonable…” (Ibid 99) Fail to meet any of the four elements and the warrant does not meet constitutional muster (see Berger v. New York (1967) wherein officers failed to stop surveillance at

    Read More

  • Mapp V. Ohio Essay

    979 Words  | 2 Pages

    The majority opinion, written by Justice Clark, states that all evidence obtained in an illegal search cannot be used as evidence in a state criminal trial.

    Read More

  • Essay On Exceptions To The Fourth Amendment

    1445 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Supreme Court has held that vehicle searches are permitted if the arrestee is unsecured and is reaching distance from the passenger compartment or if the vehicle would have evidenced related to the arrest. Riley v. California, 134 S.Ct. 999 (2014). Searches based on information received from a seized cell phone must be permitted by warrant. Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S.Ct. 1710 (2009).

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Stop And Frisk

    1514 Words  | 4 Pages

    In 1990, there was a total of 2,245 murders in New York, but over the past nine years, this total has been less than 600 (NYCLU). However, there has not been evident proof that the stop-and-frisk procedure is the reason of the declination of the crime rate. Indeed, stop-and-frisk contributes to some downturn of crime but the number is not high enough for the citizen and police to rely on. Specifically, only 3% of 2.4 million stops result in conviction. Some 2% of those arrests – or 0.1% of all stops – led to a conviction for a violent crime. Only 2% of arrests led to a conviction for possession of a weapon (Gabatt, A., 2013). In other words, the decrease in crime due to stop-and-frisk is mostly due to the discovery of possessed of weapons. Therefore, stop-and- frisk is not an effective procedure to use because it does not represent a huge impact in people’s safety (Gabatt, A., 2013). The author has done research about how police base their initiation towards the procedure of stop-and-frisk. Researchers have found that stop-and-frisk is a crime prevention strategy that gives a police officer the permission to stop a person based on “reasonable suspicion” of criminal activity and frisk based on “reasonable suspicion” that the person is armed and dangerous. This controversy is mainly because of racial profiling. “Reasonable suspicion” was described by the court as “common sense” (Avdija, A., 2013). Although, the

    Read More

  • The Stop and Frisk Program within New York City Police Department

    1527 Words  | 4 Pages

    The New York City Police Department enacted a stop and frisk program was enacted to ensure the safety of pedestrians and the safety of the entire city. Stop and frisk is a practice which police officers stop and question hundreds of thousands of pedestrians annually, and frisk them for weapons and other contraband. Those who are found to be carrying any weapons or illegal substances are placed under arrest, taken to the station for booking, and if needed given a summons to appear in front of a judge at a later date. The NYPD’s rules for stop and frisk are based on the United States Supreme Courts decision in Terry v. Ohio. The ruling in Terry v. Ohio held that search and seizure, under the Fourth Amendment, is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest. If the police officer has a “reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime” and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous”, an arrest is justified (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, at 30).

    Read More

  • 4th Amendment Violations

    1605 Words  | 4 Pages

    This action applies to conduct by government officials such as police, firemen, or an individual hired as a private actor by the government. After the first criterion has been met, the court must determine whether a search or seizure has occurred. A search is defined as the physical or technological invasion of an area deemed by the majority of the court to have a reasonable expectation of privacy. These places could be homes or a closed telephone booth, depending on the circumstances of the incident. A seizure occurs when the government takes one's personal belongings or the individual themselves.

    Read More

  • Stop-and-Frisk Policy

    1063 Words  | 3 Pages

    "Stop and Frisk." Gale Encyclopedia of American Law. Ed. Donna Batten. 3rd ed. Vol. 9. Detroit: Gale, 2010. 391-392. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 5 Nov. 2013.

    Read More

  • Fourth Amendment Exceptions

    2959 Words  | 6 Pages

    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 (1984), and California v. Greenwood (1988) which deal directly with the question of whether a person can have reasonable expectations of privacy as provided for in the fourth amendment with regards to objects in an open field or in plain view.

    Read More

  • The Stop, Question, And Frisk Case Study

    1215 Words  | 3 Pages

    Each year thousands of Americans are stopped by the police in order to be questioned and frisked. Everyone understands that each stop, question and frisk encounter violated the established constitutional rights. The legal issues which refer to the Stop, Question, and Frisk policy are associated with violation of certain rules that create a debate regarding the validity of the practices. The controversial Stop, Question, and Frisk practices require thorough investigation. It is illegal to aggressively stop and question American citizens who merely enter public places. In many cases, law enforcement personnel uses creative ways to stop, question and frisk people who have shown no evidence of being involved in criminal activity. For example, the New York Police Department’s “Operation Clean Halls” has been used since 1991 allowing local police officers to conduct the so-called “vertical patrols” by providing well-organized stop-and-frisk searches in hallways of public buildings (Mathias, 2012). Actually, the Stop, Question, and Frisk practiced in New York City by the City Police Department stands for the legal procedure, which requires stop and question thousands of people, as well as frisk them for weapons, drugs and other contraband. In fact, the Stop,

    Read More

  • Police’s right to search a cell phones and smart phones without a warrant after an arrest.

    580 Words  | 2 Pages

    As of today police officers are required to get a warrant to search any kind of property of the individual being arrested. These warrants require probable cause for the search of specific properties issued by an impartial judge. Those rights are protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Over the years, the United States Court has made exceptions to these requirements, which essentially allow the police to search certain types of property without a warrant and infuriating a lot of citizens. One of the big conflicts that citizens and officers are facing is case of Cellphones and smart phones, until now, the Court had not addressed whether this fit into an exceptions. I strongly believe that the rights of citizens should be preserved and a warrant must be issued in order to go through any information on any kind of phones.

    Read More

  • Midterm Hypothetical: The 4th Amendment And 6th Amendment

    868 Words  | 2 Pages

    A search and seizure is the phrase that describes law enforcement's gathering of evidence of a crime. Under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, any search of a person or his premises this also includes vehicles. Any seizure of tangible evidence, must be reasonable. Normally, law enforcement must obtain a search warrant from a judge, specifying where and whom they may search, and what they may seize, though in emergency circumstances, they may dispense with the warrant requirement.

    Read More

  • Patriot Act

    646 Words  | 2 Pages

    Some of the major areas of contention are as follows… Conducting "sneak and peek" searches, which allow law enforc...

    Read More

  • Government Surveillance Pros And Cons

    858 Words  | 2 Pages

    There has always been surveillance of the general public conducted by the United States government, the usual justifications being upholding the security of the nation , weeding out those who intend to bring harm to the nation, and more. But the methods for acquiring such information on citizens of the united states were not very sophisticated many years ago so the impact of government surveillance was not as great. As a result of many technological advancements today the methods for acquiring personal information - phone metadata, internet history and more - have become much simpler and sophisticated. Many times, the information acquired from different individuals is done so without their consent or knowledge. The current surveillance of people

    Read More

  • Police Corruption

    675 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the 1980’s legal tension involving police searches was a direct result of the war on drugs campaign. Officers were encouraged to stop and seize or search suspicious vehicles to put a halt on drug trafficking (Harns, 1998). But placing this aggressive approach into effect had many negative outcomes. One problem was that it put police on a thin line with the constitutional laws. To no surprise, pretty much no data estimating how often police searches fall outside constitutional laws exist. Only cases that catch the courts attention are logged into the record books. A case study held in “Middleberg” on suspect searches reports that 70 of the 86 searches didn’t result in arrest; citations weren’t presented nor were any charges filed. Just about all of the unconstitutional searches, 31 out of 34, weren’t reported to the courts, nor were they intended to be reported.

    Read More

More about Assignment 1: Warrantless Search

Open Document