1. For an arrest to be constitutionally valid, the police must have probable cause. The police can obtain probable cause in several different ways. Probable cause can include a witness statement, seeing the individual committing the crime, and evidence linking an individual to a crime. For example, the police are responding to a residential burglary when they see an individual with a backpack coming from the direction of the residence. When the individual sees the police, he drops the backpack, which opens to reveal glass cutters, a crowbar, and a screwdriver. The individual proceeds to run. The police have probable cause to arrest him because the tools in the individual’s presence correlate to tools used for gaining entrance in a burglary (the tools are also in plain view), the individual was near the area where a burglary had taken place, and the individual ran away from police.
2. Not only must police have probable cause to get a valid warrant, but
…show more content…
Sometimes police need to conduct a search and seizure, but do not have a valid warrant. Circumstances that lead to this scenario are that there are exigent/emergency situations, consent is given, or the individual(s) do not have the expectation of privacy. The police usually do not need a warrant if the life of someone is at risk. In some cases, police do not need a warrant to search a vehicle. Furthermore, if an individual voluntarily gives consent to be searched or have their property searched, the police do not need a warrant; however, police have to keep in mind that they cannot go further to what the consent encompassed. For example, the police arrive at a home of an individual suspected to be dealing drugs. The suspect is not home at the time, but his wife (i.e. co-owner) is there. The police ask the wife if they can search the premises and she gives the consent for the search; therefore, the evidence that police find at the home is admissible because the search and seizure was valid even without a