The Fourth Amendment of the United States protects U.S. citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures from government entities.
Please cite a case on one of the following areas: use of force, evidence collection, arresting power, or probable cause. Provide a brief synopsis of the case. Do you agree with the disposition of the case? Why or why not?
What constitutes unreasonable searches and seizures? Do police have the power to arrest unlawful behavior without probable cause?
ANSWER AND THEN REPLY TO MY CLASSMATE’S RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS AND EXPLAIN WHY YOU AGREE? (A MINIMUM OF 125 WORDS or MORE EACH QUESTION)
CLASSMATE’S POST
The Fourth Amendment is a constitutional doctrine that guarantees privacy to suspects regarding search and seizure of property in prosecutorial contexts in the pursuit of justice. Its establishment and application protect citizens from harassment by a powerful government. The collection and presentation of evidence in the pursuit of truth should be done lawfully and procedurally in accordance with stipulated provisions that fundamentally anchor on probable cause as a precursor for the issuance of a search warrant in ensuring admissibility of the collected evidence. The case of Weeks v. the United States in 1914 illustrates the essentiality of adherence to the provisions of the Fourth Amendment in the search and presentation of evidence.
Fermont Weeks was suspected of transporting lottery tickets through mail, which was an offence against the criminal code. Kansas City officers conducted a search at his place of work and extended the same at his house without a search warrant (
Weeks v. the United States, 1914
). Using a spare key, the opened his house and collected documents which they handed to US marshals who conducted further searches. The evidence collected was presented in court for his prosecution. His attorney urged the court to return the collected documents based on the submission regarding the violations against the Fourth Amendment, but it declined and proceeded to use them. With the evidence linking Weeks to the charge, the court convicted Weeks, but his attorney appealed.
In the petition, the attorney argued the critical importance of the Fourth Amendment on searches and seizures against which citizens are protected. In a unanimous decision, the Court overturned the district court’s decision with reference to violations of the Fourth Amendment. In the determination, the court held that the seizure and presentation s evidence private citizens’ documents meant that the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment were of no value. Also, the refusal to return the documents as petitioned violated the law.
I agree with the disposition of the case based on the facts as herein presented. The facts surrounding the case are open as viewed from the perspective of the Fourth Amendment. As described and as argued by the appellate court a ...
There are many different themes in art. These affect people in vari.docx
The Fourth Amendment of the United States protects U.S. citizens fro
1. The Fourth Amendment of the United States protects U.S.
citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures from
government entities.
Please cite a case on one of the following areas: use of force,
evidence collection, arresting power, or probable cause. Provide
a brief synopsis of the case. Do you agree with the disposition
of the case? Why or why not?
What constitutes unreasonable searches and seizures? Do police
have the power to arrest unlawful behavior without probable
cause?
ANSWER AND THEN REPLY TO MY CLASSMATE’S
RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS AND EXPLAIN
WHY YOU AGREE? (A MINIMUM OF 125 WORDS or MORE
EACH QUESTION)
CLASSMATE’S POST
The Fourth Amendment is a constitutional doctrine that
guarantees privacy to suspects regarding search and seizure of
property in prosecutorial contexts in the pursuit of justice. Its
establishment and application protect citizens from harassment
by a powerful government. The collection and presentation of
evidence in the pursuit of truth should be done lawfully and
procedurally in accordance with stipulated provisions that
fundamentally anchor on probable cause as a precursor for the
issuance of a search warrant in ensuring admissibility of the
collected evidence. The case of Weeks v. the United States in
1914 illustrates the essentiality of adherence to the provisions
of the Fourth Amendment in the search and presentation of
evidence.
Fermont Weeks was suspected of transporting lottery tickets
2. through mail, which was an offence against the criminal code.
Kansas City officers conducted a search at his place of work
and extended the same at his house without a search warrant (
Weeks v. the United States, 1914
). Using a spare key, the opened his house and collected
documents which they handed to US marshals who conducted
further searches. The evidence collected was presented in court
for his prosecution. His attorney urged the court to return the
collected documents based on the submission regarding the
violations against the Fourth Amendment, but it declined and
proceeded to use them. With the evidence linking Weeks to the
charge, the court convicted Weeks, but his attorney appealed.
In the petition, the attorney argued the critical importance of
the Fourth Amendment on searches and seizures against which
citizens are protected. In a unanimous decision, the Court
overturned the district court’s decision with reference to
violations of the Fourth Amendment. In the determination, the
court held that the seizure and presentation s evidence private
citizens’ documents meant that the protections provided by the
Fourth Amendment were of no value. Also, the refusal to return
the documents as petitioned violated the law.
I agree with the disposition of the case based on the facts as
herein presented. The facts surrounding the case are open as
viewed from the perspective of the Fourth Amendment. As
described and as argued by the appellate court and the attorney,
the Fourth Amendments protects citizens from unreasonable
searches that are especially conducted without a search warrant
(
Dharmapala
& Miceli, 2012). In the absence of a warrant, the admissibility
of the evidence collected becomes impossible within the
frameworks of the law. The fact that the search officers in
Kansas did not have a search warrant authorizing the search
violated Weeks’ rights under the Fourth Amendment.
3. Moreover, the fact that he was also no present during the
search compounded the violation.
The actions of search of search officers during the search
violate the Fourth Amendment if they are unreasonable as
determined by the analysis of two gravitational components.
First, there must be a probable cause that a crime has been
committed. In this case, a police officer should objectively
determine that the suspect under consideration has indeed
committed a crime under the circumstances (Find Law, 2019).
Probable cause serves as a prelude to the issuance of a search
warrant. Secondly, police officers should be issued with a
warrant that authorizes them to search and seize one’s property
in the pursuit of justice. The absence of any of these elements
as provided for by the Fourth Amendment constitutes
unreasonable searches.
Since the law, as analyzed above, define unreasonable searches
as those that violate the above two principles, it can be
extrapolated to the context of arrests without probable cause. A
police officer can, therefore, only effect an arrest if he has
probable cause that the person in question exhibits criminal
behavior. In the absence of probable cause, the arrest becomes
an illegal arrest.
References
Dharmapala
, D. & Miceli, T. (2012). Search, seizure and (false?) arrest: An
analysis of fourth amendment remedies when police can plant
evidence. In M., Baker & T. Miceli (Eds.),
Research handbook on economic models of law
, Edward Elgar Publishing, Illinois
Find Law (2019). When is an arrest a legal arrest? Obtained
from
