ipl-logo

Case Study Of Ted Chimel V. The State Of California

488 Words2 Pages

Parties: Ted Chimel (Plaintiff) v. The State of California (Defendant)
Facts:
The Police Officers arrived at the Plaintiff’s house with an arrest warrant for the alleged crime he had committed. The Plaintiff was not at home and his spouse let them in until Chimel return. Upon the Plaintiff entering the house, the police arrested him and request permission to search the house. The Plaintiff denied the request to search the house, but the police officers proceeded to search the house. They found coins which were stolen and later used to convict the plaintiff.
Prior Proceeding: This case was heard in the Superior Court, Orange County, California. The Plaintiff was found guilty, and he filed an appeal to the California Supreme Court, which affirmed, then petitioned to the United States Supreme Court.
Issues presented or questions of law: (1) Whether the Plaintiff …show more content…

He is also requesting that the decision be looked at by a higher court.
Defendant: The Defendant believes that the arrest warrant gave the police the authority to search the house of the Plaintiff. It was given by a Judge in good faith, and that the police officer had adequate information to execute his duties.
Holding/rule of Law:
(1) According to the Fourth Amendment, a person has rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, any search in the Plaintiff home beyond his person and the area within his immediate control is unreasonable.
(2) When the police officers arrested Chimel and search him, this all was legal, but when they started searching the house, this was illegal. They should have gone back down to the station and attain a search warrant to search the house for evidence. Therefore the evidence that was seized should be suppressed because they did not have a search warrant. This was outside the Fourth Amendment.

Show More
Related
455 Words | 2 Pages

Upon his arrival one of the officers showed Chimel the arrest warrant and asked if he could look around, Chimel objected and in the short of it said no. Even with him objecting the officers read Chimel his rights and then continued to look around the small house, garage, and workshop. In the main bedroom of Chimel home the officers found coins, medals, and tokens in the dresser drawer. Chimel was arrested and the items were placed into evidence, were he would be tried on two charges of burglary. Legal Question: When issued

Read More
478 Words | 2 Pages

The case involves the question of whether or not the police were within their rights to search the trash that was left at the curbside without a warrant. The amendment

Read More
519 Words | 3 Pages

The following essay will outline the variances of two case” Illinois v. Gates and Spinelli v. United States. It will discuss the Supreme Court requires to establish probable cause for a warrant. Illinois v. Gates In Illinois v. Gates, law enforcement received a letter (that was anonymous) stating that the Gate family was in the drug transporting business, and operating between the states of Florida and Illinois. Upon investigation, law enforcement discovered that Gates had made the purchase of an Air Line ticket, traveling to Florida.

Read More
695 Words | 3 Pages

Although, the police officers had a search warrant they had it for the wrong unit which placed a family in danger and they raided the wrong unit in the first place but then raided the right one where they find the evidence but because it was found illegally the judge dismissed all of the evidence against Shakeel “Blam” Wiggins because of the Exclusionary Rule. Now the reason the evidence was dismissed was because there was no specific address on the warrant and this means that an officer cannot just search every unit in the multi-family house until they find evidence against the

Read More
321 Words | 2 Pages

In the Supreme Court case named Carroll v. Carman, the two police officers Carroll and Roberts were investigating a report that an armed man named Zita had stolen a car and went to hide in the house of Andrew and Karen Carman. When they arrived at the house, they found there was no parking and went down a sidestreet that led to a gravel parking area. They parked in the first spots at the rear of the house. They approached the house and saw a sliding glass door that opened onto a deck. They knocked on the door and Andrew Carman came out and refused to answer their questions about Zita.

Read More
456 Words | 2 Pages

The primary question in the case of Manuel v. City of Joliet is if Manuel can make a claim based on the Fourth Amendment

Read More
430 Words | 2 Pages

Parties: Charles Katz(Plaintiff) v. United States (Defendant) Facts: The Plaintiff Charles Katz was convicted of transmitting wagering information across state lines using a public telephone which is a violation of 18 U.S.C. &1084. He was being observed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI) from February 19 to February 25, 1965 at set hours every day using the phone. After being suspicious the FBI placed listening devices on the telephone booth so they could record his calls.

Read More
527 Words | 3 Pages

The case involved an individual by the name of Danny Escobedo, who was arrested on January 19, 1960, for the murder of his brother-in-law. Escobedo was arrested without a warrant and interrogated; he did not make any statement to the police and was released after contacting his lawyer. On January 30, Benedict DiGerlando, told the police about Escobedo’s involvement in the crime that Escobedo “had fired the fatal shots” (Escobedo v. Illinois- Supreme Court Cases: The Dynamic Court, 1999, pg.2). He was later arrested a second time and taken to the police headquarters. Soon enough Escobedo requested to have “advice from my lawyer”

Read More
1593 Words | 7 Pages

v. Clayton, held that the police officers did not infringe Mr. Clayton and Mr. Farmer’s rights under ss. 8 and ss. 9 of the Charter as their unusual behaviour gave the officer reasonable grounds to conduct a pat down search. This case is significant to us for various reasons. First of all this case shows us the circumstances, when a police officer has the right to detain an individual without a search warrant.

Read More
428 Words | 2 Pages

The student’s voluntarily provided the officer with additional drugs and provided written consent, to a search of the room although they had the right to refuse the search and demand a search warrant. Reasoning/Analysis of the Court The Court held that the "plain view" exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement permitted the officers to seize clearly incriminating evidence discovered "in a place where the officer has a right to be." The Court held that the officer had a right to be at the first students’ elbow at all times. The officer obtained lawful access to the student’s dorm room and was free to seize incriminating evidence.

Read More
1400 Words | 6 Pages

It specifically states that a person is protected in their home or possessions from unreasonable seizures and searches by officers. It adds that a warrant may not be issued without credible cause defended by oath or

Read More
1430 Words | 6 Pages

Kevin Moore, an inmate formerly housed at the Poplar Hill Pre-Release Unit, raises a failure to protect claim against Defendants, Sergeant William D. Jones and Correctional Officer II Ivan Tilghman, resulting from a physical altercation Plaintiff had with another inmate. He further alleges that he would not have sustained injury if Defendant Warden John Wolfe had appropriate security in place but fails to allege any allegations against him. Irrespective of whether Plaintiff has stated a claim, he failed to exhaust administrative remedies, prior to filing suit; therefore, the Amended Complaint must be dismissed. ECI is not a person amenable to suit and is entitled to sovereign immunity.

Read More
841 Words | 4 Pages

The Supreme Court argued that the police officer had reasonable suspicion and searching the men was in the best interest of the officer for his protection. It was an eight to one decision, the one being William Douglas. He argued that they were giving too much power to police, and that there should be a court order for search and seizure. In this time period, stop and frisks were an everyday thing. Law enforcement broke the fourth amendment most of the time, abusing their badge that allowed them to search who they want, when they want, whether they were acting a certain way or not.

Read More
551 Words | 3 Pages

This violated his fourth and fourteen Amendment rights. The courts made impermissible Use of the testimony even if law enforcement had reasonable suspicion. Rule of law: An individual cannot be brought to a police station and fingerprinted without probable cause or a warrant. The courts compared the cases of Davis v. Mississippi, 394 U.S. 721. (Investigatory detentions).

Read More
860 Words | 4 Pages

____, 2009 U.S. Lexis 3120 (2009) , used the standards outlined in Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 357, 88 S. Ct. 507, 19 L. Ed. 2d 576 (1967) which states “searches conducted outside the judicial process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate, are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment – subject only to a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.” The court also used Weeks v. United States 232 U.S. 383, 392, 34 S. Ct. 341, 58 L. Ed. 652, T.D. 1964 (1914), which states that a search incident to an arrest is among one of the exceptions to the warrant requirement.

Read More

More about Case Study Of Ted Chimel V. The State Of California

Related Topics

Open Document