The Fourth Amendment What are Your Rights? Search and Seizure:

The Fourth Amendment What are Your Rights? Search and Seizure:

The Fourth Amendment 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.

Search & Seizure Model 1) WHO conducted the search/seizure? Used to determine if a search and/or seizure has occurred, and if it has occurred, was it reasonable (legal) 1) WHO conducted the search/seizure? 2) WHAT has been searched/seized? 3) Was there a SEARCH/SEIZURE? 4) If so, was it REASONABLE

1) WHO conducted the search and/or seizure? Under the Fourth Amendment a search or seizure must involve action by an agency or official of the government

2) WHAT has been searched and/or seized? Was it a person, house, paper and/or “effect” (other possesion)

3) Was there a SEARCH and/or SEIZURE? The Supreme Court has defined “Search” as any governmental intrusion into something in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

3) Was there a SEARCH and/or SEIZURE? The Supreme Court has defined “Seizure” as any taking into possession, custody or control

4) If there was a search and/or seizure, was it REASONABLE? Was there a valid search or seizure warrant? Or, did one of the exceptions to the warrant requirement apply?

Cases: Search and/or Seizure? 1) Lucy breaks into her ex boyfriend’s apartment and steals some of her old love letters to him. 2) The police order Joe to have a blood test to determine how much alcohol he has in his bloodstream

Cases: Search and/or Seizure? 3) Officer Jones stops Tim and asks him what he is doing, then looks through the suitcase Tim is carrying. 4) Tim is arrested and taken to jail. 5) The FBI puts a wiretap on Ellen’s telephone and listens to her conversations.

Reasonable vs Unreasonable For a search/seizure to be reasonable there must be a warrant issued by a judge or magistrate The police must have probable cause to convince a judge to sign a warrant There are also some exceptions to the warrant requirement.

Probable Cause There must be good reason to believe that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed, and that the person, place or thing which is to be searched or seized is involved in some way.

Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 1) Search Incident to a Lawful Arrest extends to everything w/in arrestee’s immediate control 2) Stop and Frisk can frisk outer layer of clothing with “articulable suspicion” of crime 3) Emergency Situations Bomb threats, burning buildings, etc.

Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 4) Hot Pursuit Warrant not required for places police follow suspect into. 5) Items connected with crime in Plain View If police had a right to be there in the first place 6) Consent A person may ‘knowingly and voluntarily’ let police search w/o a warrant. Must be that person’s or common property. In some case eg. parent/child, teacher/student, a person may legally let police search someone else’s property

Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 7)Abandoned Property Once you abandon something you give up the expectation of privacy. 8) Border & Airline Searches Customs Agents may search w/o warrant OR probable cause. Airline personnel may search passengers and carry on luggage with metal detectors and/or x-rays 9) Vehicle Searches Police may search a vehicle WITH Probable Cause W/O Warrant

Cases: Search and/or Seizure? Reasonable or Unreasonable? 1) Customs agents spend an entire day going through Vivian’s luggage on her return from Istanbul. They have no Warrant. 2) After Suzanne checks out of her hotel room the police come in and find receipts from illegal gambling in the wastebasket. They have no Warrant.

Cases: Search and/or Seizure? Reasonable or Unreasonable? 3) The police sneak into Gail’s yard and see 200 stolen Ipods through her kitchen window. 4) The police go to Joe’s house, his girlfriend (and roommate) agrees to let them search the house for marijuana. 5) Carol’s neighbors hear screams from her house and call the police. The police arrive, hear the screams, enter the house to investigate. They find stolen goods on the dining room table.

United States vs Ross, 1982

United States vs Ross, 1982 1) Did Detective Marcum’s opening of “Bandit’s” car trunk constitute a “search”? What about the paper bag? The cellophane envelopes? Explain your answers. 2) Assume that that opening the trunk, the brown bag and cellophane envelopes were “searches”. Do you think that they were “reasonable” under the circumstances or should the officers have secured a warrant first? Why or why not? 3) Was the unzipping of the red leather pouch at the police station a “search”? If so, was it “reasonable” under the circumstances or should the officers have obtained a warrant first? Why or why not?

United States vs Ross, 1982 In a 6-3 decision the United States Supreme Court ruled that the searches and seizures were reasonable and did not violate Mr. Ross’ Fourth Amendment rights. Cars are easily moved and evidence can easily be removed, concealed or destroyed Justices White and Marshall wrote dissenting opinions.

Group Work on Cases Work in groups of four Use the Analytical Model to work through the cases on the handout Write down your answers Be prepared to present your answers to the class and discuss

New Jersey vs T.L.O., 1985 Read the facts of the case involving high school students faced with search and seizure Be prepared to discuss and answer questions about the case at our next meeting. Be prepared for a quiz on your Fourth Amendment Rights in the near future.