ipl-logo

Essay On Search Incident

633 Words3 Pages

Search incident to arrest is permitting searches of the person and surrounding area of an arrestee as an incident to the arrest. There has been many case laws installed to protect the rights of civilians but also to allow police to do their job in taking illegal items off the streets with the arrestee. Search incident to arrest is a simple rule that opens the door for police in many ways. It’s a great tool to have but there is a strict set of rules and exceptions. The following information lists the cases that have shaped search incident to arrest to what it is today.
United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973) – The U.S. Supreme Court held that "in the case of a lawful custodial arrest a full search of the person is not only an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment, but is also a reasonable search under that Amendment."
Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914) established that after an arrest is made …show more content…

During search incident to arrest one of these requirements must be present in order to search a vehicle if you make an arrest: 1) The defendant is within reach of the vehicle or 2) Evidence directly related to the arrested offense may be found in the car. These requirements are known as the Gant Requirements from the U.S. Supreme Court Case Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009).
Search incident to arrest is also known as The Chimel Rule. In 1969 U.S. Supreme Court Case, Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969). The decision was 7-2 in favor of Chimel stating that it was unreasonable under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments that the entire house was searched after the arrest. The U.S. Supreme Court stated that it is reasonable to search the arrestee and the area that would allow the arrestee to gain access to a weapon or destroy evidence, but not areas where the arrestee could not reasonably obtain weapons or destroy

Show More
Related

  • Maryland Vs Pringle Case Study

    1331 Words  | 6 Pages

    Given the totality of circumstances, an officer has satisfied the probable cause standard to arrest an individual believing that a felony is or has occurred in the officer’s presents. This type of warrantless arrest does not violate an individual’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Decision: Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the Court’s opinion on this case. The Fourth Amendment guarantees that citizens “are to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause” This right is pushed down to the state level by way of the Fourteenth Amendment. This ensures that warrantless arrests can be conducted by police officers when the standard of probable cause has been met.

    Read More

  • Chimel Vs. California Case Study

    455 Words  | 2 Pages

    They have also said that it is reasonable for any officer to do an immediate area search of where that individual is to make sure that they can not grab anything for a weapon like for example a knife. The Supreme Court clearly notes in its opinion that such searches have to happen in the immediate area of arrest and any such search outside that area must be made with a search warrant. In Chimel case the officers could have patted down Chimel and then done a search of the immediate area to make sure that no weapons were hiding around. But once they began looking all around the house that requires a search warrant. The Supreme Court reversed the California Supreme Court’s

    Read More

  • The Fourth Amendment: The Threats In The United States

    469 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Fourth Amendment protects persons against unreasonable searches and seizures. Police deal with search and seizure incidents on a daily basis; unfortunately, numerous mistakes are made and lawsuits result from this type of citizen interaction. One way to prevent an unnecessary lawsuit is to get a search warrant. What if that is not applicable to your situation? There are several search warrant exceptions that may be applied to most investigative incidents.

    Read More

  • Riley Vs California Case Study

    933 Words  | 4 Pages

    A warrantless search is only reasonable if it is within the specified exception to the Fourth Amendment’s requirements of a warrant. The specific exception covers the applicability of warrantless search conducted incident to a lawful arrest. In this case, such a warrant is only justified by officers’ safety interests or while seeking to prevent potential evidence destruction. Data on a suspect’s cell phone cannot physically harm an officer.

    Read More

  • Police Violate The Fourth Amendment

    234 Words  | 1 Pages

    In the case, the Court did not see sufficient evidence to support the claim that the police violated the respondent’s Fourth Amendment right, prior to entering the resident. There is no evidence of threats or demands made by the police officers, that would insinuate the officer did anything wrong. Because the police in this case did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment prior to the exigency, the Court held that the exigency did in fact justify the warrantless search. The officers re-acted upon suspicion and training (Vile, n.d.).

    Read More

  • Case Study: Payton V. New York

    325 Words  | 2 Pages

    Facts: Law enforcement gathered enough evidence to establish probable cause that Payton murdered a gas station employee. Without an arrest warrant, agents entered the suspect’s home with force to make an arrest. Payton was not home at the time of the entry but in plain view officers found a shell casing that was used for evidence. Issue: Is it unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure Clause for law enforcement to enter a home without an arrest warrant or search warrant

    Read More

  • The United States V. Place 462 US Case Brief

    510 Words  | 3 Pages

    Significance: 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

    Read More

  • Chapter 4: Criminal Investigatory Search Warrants

    579 Words  | 3 Pages

    Chapter 4 is titled "Criminal Investigatory Search Warrants. " Search warrant laws are found in the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The elements of a search warrant include: (1) an order in writing, (2) issued by a proper judicial authority, (3) in the name of the people, (4) directed to a law enforcement officers, (5) commanding the officer to search for certain personal property, and (6) commanding the officer to bring that property before the judicial authority named in the warrant. Neutral judicial officers such as clerks of court, magistrates, complaint justices, judges, and justices of the peace are allowed to issue search warrants in their permitted jurisdictions. They must have probable cause before they can authorize a search warrant, which is usually done through an affidavit submitted by the law

    Read More

  • Wilson Vs Arkansas Case Study

    292 Words  | 2 Pages

    This is an emergency because the woman was being beaten by her husband and could not defend herself. Officers also do not need to obtain a warrant under exigent circumstances. These circumstances include when a suspect is in hot pursuit, suspect is fleeing, imminent destruction of evidence, or the lives of officer or other people are in danger. In this case, the life of a person was in danger, which was the emergency that allowed the officers to enter into the house under the exceptions. When the officers arrived at the house/crime scene, they knocked and announced their presence.

    Read More

  • Case Study On Riley Vs California

    922 Words  | 4 Pages

    Because of the police arrangement of appropriating, San Diego Police Department require to direct a stock inquiry on the vehicle to record it at time of seizure, as security against obligation asserts in not so distant future. 3. While the search the cops discovered two weapons and arrested Riley for ownership of those weapons (guns). Riley was arrested and his cellphone was seized. In the examination report of the cellphone, two-organize warrantless inquiry of computerized digital search was performed.

    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

  • Wolf V. Colorado Case Brief

    584 Words  | 3 Pages

    Before 1948 Julius A. Wolf had been arrested and tried for reasons not stated in the Supreme Court case, but the evidence that was used against Wolf was taken unlawfully, the police had no warrant for his arrest as well as no warrant to search his office. Wolf was able to get an appeal to be tried one more time. In 1948 the trial Wolf v Colorado Supreme Court had begun. It was a very controversial topic because the case was based on the violation of the Fourth Amendment right of protection from search and seizures.

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay On Stop And Frisk

    796 Words  | 4 Pages

    An officer may only be allowed to search a person 's personal belongings if their reasoning is associated with a lawful arrest and if they have a probable cause to search (Matthews). After it being a huge deal in New York, other cities and states began embracing the use of stop-and-frisk as it began growing around the United States. In the 1950s police officials in other cities took up, and expanded, the stop-and-search tactics by using the LAPD to embrace the theory of crime

    Read More

  • Schneckloth V. Bustamte Summary

    407 Words  | 2 Pages

    Title: Schneckloth v. Bustamonte Date/Court: The United States Supreme Court, 1973 Facts: This case deals with Clyde Bustamonte, who tried to defraud a check. At 2:40 a.m. local Sunnyvale Police Officer James Rand stopped a vehicle that had a burnt out headlight and license plate light. When Officer Rand approached the vehicle he found that the individuals Joe Alcala, Bustamonte, and Joe Gonzales were in the front seat. In the rear of the vehicle Officer Rand saw three older gentlemen, Officer Rand then asked the driver if he had identification and the driver (Gonzales) did not have any. Rand then asked the other individuals in the car and only Alcala had a valid license, after producing his license Alcala told the officer that the car was his brothers.

    Read More

  • Arguments Against The Exclusionary Rule

    493 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ohio (1961), the Supreme Court trusted that the Constitution charged the exclusionary rule as a remaking of a Fourth Amendment infringement. They saw the truths of the sample, the exclusionary rule which was the assurance of somebody 's protection furthermore required by the Due Process which portrayed the Fourteenth Amendment. The rule stated three purposes by the Mapp Court, the right given by the constitution and stated that when police admitted that they were at fault, judges then extended the violations in court. This would stop misconduct for negligence since the case of Mapp the Supreme Court has seized out many exceptions to the exclusionary rule. I would agree with exclusionary rule, searches are easy to get permission from most defendants.

    Read More

More about Essay On Search Incident

Open Document