Case Study Of Ted Chimel V. The State Of California

488 Words2 Pages

Parties: Ted Chimel (Plaintiff) v. The State of California (Defendant) Facts: The Police Officers arrived at the Plaintiff’s house with an arrest warrant for the alleged crime he had committed. The Plaintiff was not at home and his spouse let them in until Chimel return. Upon the Plaintiff entering the house, the police arrested him and request permission to search the house. The Plaintiff denied the request to search the house, but the police officers proceeded to search the house. They found coins which were stolen and later used to convict the plaintiff. Prior Proceeding: This case was heard in the Superior Court, Orange County, California. The Plaintiff was found guilty, and he filed an appeal to the California Supreme Court, which affirmed, then petitioned to the United States Supreme Court. Issues presented or questions of law: (1) Whether the Plaintiff …show more content…

He is also requesting that the decision be looked at by a higher court. Defendant: The Defendant believes that the arrest warrant gave the police the authority to search the house of the Plaintiff. It was given by a Judge in good faith, and that the police officer had adequate information to execute his duties. Holding/rule of Law: (1) According to the Fourth Amendment, a person has rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, any search in the Plaintiff home beyond his person and the area within his immediate control is unreasonable. (2) When the police officers arrested Chimel and search him, this all was legal, but when they started searching the house, this was illegal. They should have gone back down to the station and attain a search warrant to search the house for evidence. Therefore the evidence that was seized should be suppressed because they did not have a search warrant. This was outside the Fourth Amendment.

More about Case Study Of Ted Chimel V. The State Of California

Open Document