Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why do a fourth amendment aduit
The 4th amendment explained
Why do a fourth amendment aduit
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why do a fourth amendment aduit
The 4th amendment explained
Why do a fourth amendment aduit
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
On 03-21-2016, at approximately 9:25 am CSA Stewart observed Jalin D’Angelo Brown entering the search area with a grocery bag with a half of peanut butter and jelly sandwich with an unusual smell. Mr. Stewart asks Jalin Brown what was in the bag and Jalin replied, “It’s just a sandwich.” Upon a closer investigation of the sandwich, CSA Stewart realized that the sandwich was layered with an illegal substance. He took a closer look and noticed that it was “Marijuana called, “Loud,” which was over the interior of the bag. Jalin Brown was turned over to the Dean of Students (Mr. Barnes) and SRO Friday who also confirmed that the sandwich was layered with marijuana.
Opinion: The opinion for this case was 6-3 upholding to Mapp. She used the First Amendment rights for her case during court. However, Mapps also used the Fourth Amendment to the U.S Constitution saying that because it was an unfair search and seizure. Her house was her privacy and they were unfairly trespassing. 10.
The majority opinion discussed the Fourth Amendment and explains now it provides the the ability to arrest individuals without a warrant when the officers have probable cause that a suspect has committed a criminal offense. During this traffic stop, the arresting officer determined a crime had occurred. It was up to the court to determine if the officer had probable cause to arrest Pringle. Chief Justice Rehnquist determined that the arresting officers proved a crime occurred and there was probable cause to determine Pringle should be arrested. According to Chief Justice Rehnquist, when three people are in the car where drugs are located and the owner of the drugs is not clear with no one admitting possession, it is reasonable for the officers to believe that either one or all of the occupants of the vehicle committed the offense.
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.
Case: New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) Facts: A high school freshman (T.L.O) had her purse searched by the Assistant Vice Principal at her school because a teacher found her and another student smoking in the lavatory. The Assistant Vice Principal uncovered cigarettes and marijuana. Procedural history: T.L.O. motioned to suppress the evidence because her Fourth Amendment rights were violated and was denied by the Juvenile Court stating the search was reasonable. The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court agreed there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment. The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the decision stating the search was unreasonable.
Police believed that Mapp was harboring a suspected bomber, and demanded entry. No suspect was found, but police discovered a trunk of obscene pictures in Mapp 's basement. Mapp was arrested for possessing the pictures, and was convicted in an Ohio court where she lost the case in fighting her for first amendment rights. Then, Mapp argued that her Fourth Amendment rights had been violated by the search of the officers and got her case taken to the U.S. Supreme Court where she won. At the time of the case, unlawfully seized evidence was banned from federal courts but not state courts, meaning that the evidence found in Mapp’s home was used against her in the Ohio court, but not the U.S. Supreme Court.
Amy Albritton went to Houston to a job offer that her boyfriend, Wilson, got. While Wilson was driving Albritton’s car they were stopped by a police. The officer David Helms, with the consent of Albritton, searched her car. Helms found a white crumb on the floor, the officer believed it was crack cocaine,.
Karen and her friends went door to door to their friends’ houses asking for stories to go in the newspaper. Karen went to Charlie’s house and snuck into Charlie’s room and found a $5 bracelet for his girlfriend and put it into their newspaper without asking Charlies for permission to do so first. Karen and her friends were invading Charlie’s privacy. Karen’s parents read the 3m Gazette newspaper and she was
It was her Uncle Al’s birthday party and beth needed to get pants. When Beth got to the mall she walked by Madge P. Groton the stocky, ugly security guard. Beth started to try on pants when she went to get another size and that when the trouble started. When she went to look for pants the security guard thought she was stealing and called the cops. When the cops arrested her she said she had evidence to show the cop that she didn´t steal.
Tonya Hailey rested uncomfortably in her bed in the Ford County hospital. The medicine given to her a few hours prior was still in full affect so pain was not a problem. However, the mental damage inflicted on her by the white men in their yellow truck was still fresh in her mind. When she closed her eyes, she could picture nothing but their silhouettes standing over her bounded body doing unspeakable acts. Tonya could only pray and let her mind wander, would she be ok?
1. The Fourth Amendment protects the fundamental of search and seizure. Which in this case, discusses the importance of obtaining physical evidence and how it is used. In other words, the Fourth Amendment can be violated if the evidence gathered has been obtained unreasonably.
Topic: In the 1970’s, many schools operating in Dade County used corporal punishment as a form of punishment for misbehavior. A male student attending a Dade County Junior High School was forcibly restrained and paddled after failing to allegedly adhere to school policies. The student claimed that the paddling of students as a means of maintaining school discipline constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, violating the Eighth Amendment; Issues: (1) Was it unconstitutional for the school to administer corporal punishment under the Eighth Amendment? (2) Did the school’s principal and vice principal violate the student’s Eighth Amendment by restraining him during punishment? (3) Under the Fourteenth Amendment, was the principal required
Earlier this month, a “sexting ring” at Canon City High School in Colorado was uncovered by school authorities. Involved were minors and legal adults, who had scandalist pictures and images of naked minors. This has brought upon the question of, “How do you prosecute and punish those involved in these acts?” Those responsible for these acts must take the punishment which they are served when the time comes. The judge is gathering the information and having the ones involved questioned.
The police practice of carding is fundamentally perceived as a race and class issue that has come to define a tumultuous relationship between police and people of colour from the past to modern-day, causing a mistrust in police and the system. The practice of police stops allow police to operate in a grey area by obtaining evidence and information through psychological intimidation, many times directed to youth. The recent call for legislation and accountability of police has brought the issue to the forefront of media and public concern. There have been many police and community based investigations on the practice, one being the Police and Community Engagement Review (PACER). PACER stipulated that the police were going to go forward
The criminal justice emphasis on Client-Oriented service owes its start to Thomas J. Peters and Robert H. Waterman Jr. as in their work, In Search of Excellence, they studied 62 private sector companies that were well managed and had achieved their objectives (Cronkhite, 2013). They analyzed companies such as IBM, 3M, McDonalds and Delta Airlines (Cronkhiite, 2013). From the study emerged 8 characteristics that created excellence in each of the companies: “a bias for action; close to the customer; autonomy and entrepreneurship; productivity through people; hands-on, value driven; sticking to knitting; simple form, lean staff, and simultaneous loose/tight properties” (Cronkhite, 2013, p. 72). The excellence achieved by these companies