4th Circuit Case Study
THIS COURT SHOULD REJECT THE FOURTEENTH CIRCUIT’S TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES APPROACH AND INSTEAD APPLY A BRIGHT LINE STANDARD OF REVIEW TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN AUTHORIZED DRIVER OF A RENTAL CAR HAS STANDING TO CHALLENGE THE LEGALITY OF THE SEARCH
The Fourteenth Circuit Court of Appeals improperly applied the totality of the circumstances approach in determining that Respondent Larry Nightingale has standing to assert a Fourth Amendment challenge to the search of the rental vehicle he was driving at the time of the traffic stop checkpoint. The Fourth Amendment requires that the one who is making the challenge of the legality of a search to prove that he was personally the victim of an invasion of privacy. Rakas v Illinois, 439 U.S. 128,
…show more content…
United States v. Thomas, 447 F.3d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 2006). First, the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Tenth Circuits have adopted a comprehensive bright-line rule that a driver who is not authorized by the rental agreement to drive has no reasonable expectation of privacy and therefore no standing to challenge a search of the vehicle. See United States v. Kennedy, 638 F.3d 159, 165 (3d Cir. 2011); United States v. Wellons, 32 F.3d 117, 119 (4th Cir. 1994); United States v. Seeley, 331 F.3d 471, 472 (5th Cir. 2003); United States v. Roper, 918 F.2d 885, 887–88 (10th Cir. 1990). Alternatively, the Eighth and Ninth Circuits have adopted a rule based on permission and modify the bright-line rule where an unauthorized driver who received permission to use a rental car has joint authority over the car and may challenge a search under the Fourth Amendment. See United States v. Thomas, 447 F.3d 1191, 1198–99 (9th Cir. 2006); United States v. Best, 135 F.3d 1223 (8th Cir. 1998); United States v. Muhammed, 58 F.3d 353, 355 (8th Cir. 1995). Finally, the Sixth Circuit has applied a multiple factor totality of the circumstances test to determine whether an unauthorized driver has standing. United States v. Smith, 263 F.3d 571, 586 (6th Cir.
Nick Spears Vs. Texas Penal Code: Case Study
1392 Words | 6 PagesAs in Whistler, Spears also had the golf cart running, the parking brake was disengaged, and the transmission was also in drive. The defendant of Whistler argued that he never drove the vehicle, however the court found the fact that he took an action towards operating the vehicle by putting it in drive as sufficient for finding that the defendant was operating the vehicle. Spears, similarly to Wilson, also put the car in gear and it may be inferred that Spears action was towards operating the vehicle and that if he did not fall asleep and was not wedged against the mailbox that he would have driven the vehicle. Further, in Morris, the court found that a defendant could not be found to “operate” a vehicle just because the car was running. In order for a car to be considered “operating” the defendant has to engage the transmission or show evidence of manipulating the controls of the vehicle to show an action sufficient for finding that the defendant was “operating” the vehicle.
Case Study Of Illinois V. Caballes
830 Words | 4 PagesIllinois v. Cabelles In 1998 Roy Caballes was pulled over for speeding, the police officers were entirely within the law and their jurisdiction, however, when they hindered the stop and preformed a sniff search they violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The officer Gillette proceeds as he does in all traffic stops and requested Caballes for his license, registration, and insurance and if he had any warrants, Caballes stated he did not, in addition if he had ever been arrested before in which Caballes stated he had not. The officer’s last request to search Caballes vehicle, Caballes kindly stated no. Upon returning to his police cruiser to run a want and warrants check on Caballes, Officer Gillette found out that Caballes had been arrested
The United States V. Place 462 US Case Brief
510 Words | 3 PagesSignificance: The Supreme Court here expresses that governmental conduct like drug dog sniffing that can reveal whether a substance is contraband, yet no other private fact, does not compromise any privacy interest, and therefore is not a search subject to the Fourth Amendment. Terry v. Ohio permits only brief investigative stops and extremely limited searches based on reasonable suspicion including seizures of property independent of the seizure of the
Maryland Vs Pringle Case Study
743 Words | 3 PagesThe 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.
Billy Greenwood And Dyanne Van Houten Summary
602 Words | 3 PagesIn 1988, California v. Billy Greenwood and Dyanne Van Houten was about a suspecting of selling and using drugs in Mr. Greenwood house a narcotic officer told the man to bring her the trash bag which Greenwood had placed out the street for pick up, but as the officer search the bags she found drug paraphernalia which was used as evidence to convict Mr. Greenwood but the lower court revoked it because she search the trash bag without a warrant and that was a violation of the fourth amendment. but the trash bags was placed on the street were any child or animal can unseal it so he could not argue about his privacy if it was out in the police for anything or any person to expose the content of the bags but the court stated “ the police cannot reasonably be expected to avert their eyes from evidence of criminal activity that could have been observed by any member of the public “ this means
Rhetorical Analysis: Hoffa V. United States
625 Words | 3 PagesOne of, if not, the most provocative arguments Kerr offers in his article is that the third-party doctrine should not be framed in terms of “reasonable expectation of privacy” in which a person “waives” their reasonable expectation of privacy, but rather as a consent doctrine. In his view, what we voluntarily disclose to third parties eliminates Fourth Amendment protection because of implied consent. Specifically, a person voluntarily discloses information to a third party if they do so knowingly. Consequently, searches, if a government agent’s conduct is deemed as such, are reasonable because the person allowed the government to do so. Kerr’s example for his principle is problematic.
Case Brief Griswold V. Connecticut
624 Words | 3 PagesGriswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) Facts: Two plaintiff, Griswold and Buxton, were the Executive and Medical Directors for Planned Parenthood League at Connecticut State respectively. They had been accused and later convicted and fined $100 each for violating the Connecticut Comstock Act of 1873. The Act illegalized any use of drugs, medical item, or any other appliance for the purposes of preventing conception. Griswold and Buxton had been found quilt of giving information, medical advices, and counselling to couples about family planning.
Terry Vs Frisk
675 Words | 3 PagesAlthough, the decision tested the true meaning of the 4th amendment, it also provided clarity as well as security for the men and women who serve in law enforcement. The ruling allowed law enforcement to legally “Frisk” a subject, thereby providing law enforcement officers the opportunity to protect themselves. Furthermore, it is through these reasonable stops and pat downs that thousands of arrests are made for illegal activity. For example, the New York Police Department through the increase in police enforcement, along with what is referred to as “Stop and Frisk”, saw a 80% reduction in the homicide rate, therefore protecting and saving thousands of lives through this court
Wolf V. Colorado Case Brief
584 Words | 3 PagesThe 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).
Dk Dbq Analysis
742 Words | 3 PagesAccording 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.
The Pros And Cons Of Unwarranted Search
471 Words | 2 PagesThe Fourth Amendment forbids unreasonable searches and seizures from police officers, unless a search warrant has been allowed by the Court. However, the Supreme Court ruled that unwarranted searches will be acceptable if: the officer reasonably feels the search is necessary for his/her own safety, if probable cause leads the officer to believe a crime has been committed, if the person consents to the search, or if the person has been arrested, and the search is related to the crime. These reasons are arguably fair, as a police officer should be able to act on intuition if he/she feels as though his/her life is in danger or the lives of other. However, this opens up the possibility for racial bias affecting the judgment of police officers,
Acceptance And Complications Of The Exclusionary Rule
2659 Words | 11 PagesThe term paper will circulate around the Exclusionary Rule’s purpose, applications, limitations, and complications alongside with landmark cases pertaining to each component. The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle stating that evidence obtained in violation of a person's Constitutional rights, such as the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, may not be used against them in court. This is significant in understanding how the Supreme Court utilizes the U.S Constitution to infer the writer’s intention as to what should be permissible today. The purpose portion of the essay will examine why the rule was formally integrated in American law, and how judges can use it to infer what the writers of the Constitution
Pros And Cons Of Stop And Frisk
780 Words | 4 PagesThe act of “Stop and Frisk” began in the early 1900’s when crime rates began to escalate in major cities such as New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia. Stop, question, and frisk, or SQF, is an urban policing measure that involves the large-scale deployment of officers in public spaces (e.g., sidewalks, alleys, the communal outdoor spaces of public housing) tasked with conducting frequent investigative stops (Huq, A. Z. (2017). In the articles provided, it is questioned whether New York’s stop and frisk policy is constitutional or not. I agree with the court's ruling, I believe Judge Scheindlin seemed too involved. “Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, the appeals court said, jeopardized "the appearance of partiality ... by a series of media interviews and public statements purporting to respond publicly to criticism of the District Court”
Mapp Vs Ohio Case Study
1872 Words | 8 Pages41. Mapp v. Ohio (1961): The Supreme Court ruling that decided that the fourth amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures must be extended to the states. If there is no probable cause or search warrant issued legally, the evidence found unconstitutionally will be inadmissible in the courtroom and not even considered when pressing charges. The exclusionary rule, in this case, is a right that will restrict the states and not just the federal government, including the states in more of the federal rights as outlined in the Constitution.
Arguments Against The Exclusionary Rule
493 Words | 2 PagesThe exclusionary rule is a lawful principle that the United States use, which expresses that the confirmation that was powerfully utilized by the police can 't be utilized in a criminal trial. The motivation behind why this is done it’s for the security of the established rights. In addition, the exclusionary rule states that in the Fifth Amendment no one "should be denied of life, freedom, or property without due procedure of law." The exclusionary rule additionally expresses that in the Fourth Amendment it is intended to shield residents from unlawful pursuits and seizures. It also applies to the infringement of the Sixth Amendment, which ensures the privilege to counsel.
More about 4th Circuit Case Study
Nick Spears Vs. Texas Penal Code: Case Study
1392 Words | 6 PagesCase Study Of Illinois V. Caballes
830 Words | 4 PagesThe United States V. Place 462 US Case Brief
510 Words | 3 PagesMaryland Vs Pringle Case Study
743 Words | 3 PagesBilly Greenwood And Dyanne Van Houten Summary
602 Words | 3 PagesRhetorical Analysis: Hoffa V. United States
625 Words | 3 PagesCase Brief Griswold V. Connecticut
624 Words | 3 PagesTerry Vs Frisk
675 Words | 3 PagesWolf V. Colorado Case Brief
584 Words | 3 PagesDk Dbq Analysis
742 Words | 3 PagesThe Pros And Cons Of Unwarranted Search
471 Words | 2 PagesAcceptance And Complications Of The Exclusionary Rule
2659 Words | 11 PagesPros And Cons Of Stop And Frisk
780 Words | 4 PagesMapp Vs Ohio Case Study
1872 Words | 8 PagesArguments Against The Exclusionary Rule
493 Words | 2 Pages