ipl-logo

Supreme Court Case Analysis

1103 Words5 Pages

In this paper I will be discussing the United States Supreme Court decision in Arizona v. Gant on automobile searches. I will discuss the case Implications for policy changes and practices of the 4th admendment. I will use comparative methods by using a legal analysis of prior cases similar to this. The paper will illustrate how this case changed settle case law on searches of automobiles incident to arrest. In this paper, I will also explain what the fourth admendment of the constitution reads, and how Arizona v. Gant limits police vehicle searches.
United States Supreme Court Decision in Arizona v. Gant
Prior to the Supreme Court’s opinion on Arizona v. Grant it was a standard practice under New York v Belton for police to conduct a search …show more content…

No warrants shall be issue but upon probable cause, it must be supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons and things to be seized. In reality, there are always other ways to obtaining a search warrant. The 4th admendment says tha the search must be executed reasonably. Usually the federal agents can execute warrants. State and local ifficers can help the feds even if they working outside their jurisdiction as long as the federal agent remains in charge of the execution of the search. Private citizens can also help the federal agents as long as the private citizens are serving a legitimate investigation function. You also have concent to search that are made by law enforcement officers based on concent of the person whom live in the property. This is the most common form of warrantless search and a search warrant or probable cause is not necessary if consent is given by someone with proper …show more content…

Grant who was arrested in Tucson, Arizona police arrested him and charged him with driving under a suspended license. Police arrested him in a friend’s backyard after he parked the vehicle and was walking away. Grant an all other suspects in the scene where arrested. The officers then searched Grant’ vehicle and found a weapon with a bag of cocaine. Then They charged him with possession of a narcotic drug for sale and possession of drug paraphernalia. In the case officers received an anonymous tip that drugs were being sold from a residence , then they knocked on that door, and Rodney Gant opened. He told officers that he did not own the home but he expected the homeowner to come soon. Using the strategy of traffic violations in hopes of getting a free search for evidence of other crimes, police officers conducted a license check, and found Gant license was suspended. When Gant returned he was arrested for driving under a suspended license then they conducted a search of his automobile in which they found a gun and cocaine in a jacket. Gant argued that the search of his automobile was not justified as a search incident to arrest because he was handcuffed, not within reaching distance of the automobile, and because he had been arrested for a traffic offense for which no evidence could be found in the

Show More
Related

Case Study: Spinelli V. United States

519 Words | 3 Pages

With surveillance, they observe that he meet with a person, and proceed to return to Illinois, via driving. Based on the anonymous tip and the observation of said events, matching in similarity to the information provided in the letter, the law enforcement obtained a search warrant. Duing the exection of the search warrant, a massive durg load was discovered in Gates car, he was subsequently arrested. The decision of the Trial Courts, made judgement that there was no probable cause, thus invalidating the search warrant, leaving the drugs found, inadmissible to the case.

Read More

Maryland Vs Pringle Case Study

217 Words | 1 Pages

Facts: Police pull over a car with Joseph Pringle and two other people in the car, and Pringle was in the front seat of the car, when law enforcement officials search the car. Police officers discover in the car baggies of cocaine in the back seat of the car and $763 in the compartment up front. None of the three people in the car would confess to whom the drug belonged to and so all of them were arrested. When arriving at the police station Pringle admitted that the cocaine belong to him and then he was charged with intent to sell and possession of cocaine. Pringle then stated that there was no probable cause to arrest him, and the Maryland court system stated there was probable cause and proceed to convict him (Maryland v Pringle 540 U.S.

Read More

Exclusionary Rule In The Weeks V. United States Case

475 Words | 2 Pages

The Weeks v United States case was the Supreme Court basis in determining to incorporate the Fourth Amendment into the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause and apply the exclusionary rule in state cases. In this essay, I am going to discuss the reason why the Supreme Court determine that the exclusionary rule should apply to the state police activity. Prior to the case of Weeks v United States, the state police activity “were not limited in their conduct by the Fourth Amendment” (Ingram p.81) and the exclusionary rule of Fourth Amendments illegal search and seizure only applies to federal law enforcement officers. Basically, it means that state law enforcement officials can illegally search and seized criminal activity evidence and court don’t prohibit the use of illegally obtained evidence in the trial court.

Read More

Terry Vs Ohio Case Study

240 Words | 1 Pages

The first case that caused the Supreme Court to allow officers to authorize a search and seizure, was the Terry vs. Ohio case in 1968. The case ruled whether or not it violated the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protection from an unreasonable search and seizure. The Supreme Court then determined that the practice of stopping and frisking a suspect in public does not violate the Fourth Amendment as long as the officer has a “reasonable suspicion”. Suspicions such as a person that may seem like they’re planning a crime, have committed a crime, or that may be armed and appear as dangerous. The reason why this policy escalated was due to an incident that happened On October 31, 1963 in Cleveland, Ohio.

Read More

Gift Cards Case Summary

617 Words | 3 Pages

I, Judge Yen, find the evidence of the gift cards seized from Turner Round’s car inadmissible on the grounds of the violation of his 4th Amendment rights. Starting from the beginning, the stop that Officer Oliver Towns made of Mr. Round for a broken headlight is constitutional. Officer Towns verification of Round’s identity and vehicular history is also constitutional because it is an established police procedure. From verifying Mr. Round’s identity he discovered there was an active arrest warrant for the possession of marijuana and is allowed to arrest Mr. Round on those grounds. Although in the facts of the case, it is never explicitly stated that Mr. Round was arrested and read his Miranda rights, it is objectively clear that he is under arrest since Officer Towns placed Mr. Round in the back of

Read More

Wolf V. Colorado Case Brief

584 Words | 3 Pages

The police violated Wolf’s rights and since there was no warrant for arrest or warrant to search his office the police was trespassing. The police officer who violated his rights was to be punished by his superiors. The judges decided that using such evidence goes completely against the Fourth Amendment which is a basic need to our freedom. States should follow this law but are not directly forced to. States using evidence that should be excluded in their “statute becomes a form, and its protection an illusion,”(Wolf v Colorado, 1949).

Read More

Essay On 4th Amendment

962 Words | 4 Pages

The 4th amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” In the context of the 4th amendment, a search is considered or happens, “when a governmental employee or agent of the government violates an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy.” (Ryan) An example of a search under the 4th amendment is forms of searches such as stip searches or visual body searches but they have to be supported by a probable cause and be conducted in a reasonable matter. A seizure of an individual under the 4th amendment means or happens , “when the police's conduct would communicate to a reasonable person, taking into account the circumstances surrounding the encounter, that the person is not free to ignore the police presence and leave at his will.”

Read More

Dk Dbq Analysis

742 Words | 3 Pages

According to the Fourth Amendment, people have the right to be secure in their private property, and may only be searched with probable cause. However, in a recent case, this right was violated by the government. An Oregon citizen, with the initials of DLK, was suspected of growing marijuana in his home. The federal government used a thermal imager to scan his home, and were later given a warrant to physically search his home. However, many remain divided over whether or not this scan was constitutional, as there was no warrant at the time of the scan.

Read More

Fourth Amendment Misconceptions

106 Words | 1 Pages

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Consitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. The common misconception is that it simply covers what it states. In the age of development and new technology, it is likely that what we consider secrets or personal information is not as secret or personal as we once believed. Important pieces of evidence or information have often been found through illegal means, and this has led to many cases that change the way the constitution and the Fourth Amendment affect

Read More

Importance Of The Fourth Amendment To The United States

670 Words | 3 Pages

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the unlawful search and seizure of the personal residences of citizens, and also outlines the right to privacy that is awarded to citizens of the United States. The fourth amendment states: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things being seized. Even after the ratification of the Fourth Amendment, it was permissible for evidence that was seized and collected without a warrant and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to be admissible in court. This remained the common practice until 1914.

Read More

Argumentative Essay On The Fourth Amendment

427 Words | 2 Pages

To begin, we need to understand the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment was created to prevent the government from breaching into our homes and convicting us of crimes based on evidence they discover within our homes. It was vital to state unreasonable searches in the constitution, and an unreasonable search is a search done without

Read More

Fourth Amendment Definition

361 Words | 2 Pages

Everyday people are accused of doing things they did or didn’t do and police go through their things, the fourth amendment protects people from being searched. The fourth amendment has helped many people in the U.S.A. everyday. Its meaning and purpose is to protect U.S. citizens belongings. Which has an enduring impact on lots of peoples lives.

Read More

The Privacy Of The Fourth Amendment

270 Words | 2 Pages

The fourth amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” To me, this means, in order for the American people to feel that they and their belongings are safe, only an official sworn into office can issue a warrant. This warrant can also be issued with probable cause, or reasonable belief, that some crime has been committed. Upon issuance of said warrant, the sworn official must specify exactly where police are allowed to search and the exact things or people they are allowed to look for and take in their investigation.

Read More

Benefits Of The Fourth Amendment

752 Words | 4 Pages

In addition, the law enforcement only needs to be “supported by a probable cause” or an “arrest warrant,” to search a United States citizen. Although, the police officer could arrest a suspect to stop them from running away or to preserve evidence. Besides the Fourth Amendment is still beneficial for all United States

Read More

The Importance Of Automobile Search

1130 Words | 5 Pages

Automobile searches and many other types of searches and seizures are protected by the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment to the constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Searches can only be justifiable if provided a warrant, probable cause, supported by oath of or affirmations. Automobile searches are an important aspect when it comes to police work. Without the ability to conduct warrantless searches on vehicles, the ability to get away with a crime while in a motor vehicle very easy and would become a simple and typical task in the criminal world.

Read More

More about Supreme Court Case Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document