The Fourth Amendment “…protect citizens against warrantless searches of homes and papers and effects.” The officer Vidal has all right to arrest Kurt since he got the warrant, at same time when no one is presented or o one home the officer needs to wait or came back in other time, but he got in and found the marijuana and other drug. “No state shall pass…. any ex post facto
Washington Post has posted on May 24, 2015 that the FBI confirms that no major terrorism cases were caught form the Patriot phone data collection (Krieger, 2015) The American Civil Liberties Union filed a law suit against the government in 2013. The case provides evidence that the Patriot Act is infringing on American’s privacy, freedom of speech and association. Within the Patriot Act, surveillance of phone records such as phone numbers, and duration is being collected across the United States. The ACLU deals with defending the civil liberties and those phone surveillance and would have drastic impact on how they advocate for Civil rights (Kaufman,
To be frank, the fourth amendment is a security blanket for American citizens; it protects them from illegal searches and seizures. The amendment was one of the first ten, which made up the original bill of rights in the constitution. Many were added to it since then, but the first ten remain extremely important. Without the fourth amendment, America and its citizens could be subject to searches and seizures at any time. By law the constitution states that the fourth amendment is 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
In New Jersey v T.L.O a vice-principal believed a student was violating the law. The vice principal searched a student 's bag and found evidence the student was dealing drugs. The court said that the search of a student by a school official will be justified when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that is violating school code or the law. In the case of Klump v. Nazareth Area School District school officials did not see a drug related text message until after the school searched the cell phone. The court said that it 's only lawful to search if the official has reasonable grounds to suspect the search will provide evidence the student has violated school rules and if the search is related to the reasoning for the initial search.
Your lack of knowledge about firearms might show that a fear of lawful firearms owners rules your thinking. That is unfortunate, because not all of us live within five blocks of a police station that is just chomping at the bit to answer a call for assistance when a home invader is trying to kill you, or an armed robber has cornered you. My response to danger to myself and my family is the ability to defend us immediately, not 15 minutes later when the police arrive to take pictures of my corpse & crime scene. You are free to do it your way and I wish you no harm, but I dare you to put a "No Firearms Here" sign on your front lawn...how long do you think it will be before the knife-wielding thug comes thru your front door with bad intentions? Are you going to outlaw knives next?
A different federal judge ruled that if the DEA wishes to use a stingray to bring in a criminal then they must have a warrant to use it [source]. The argument that a lot of people will make when it comes to surveillance is that if you’ve done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide. If we apply that same logic to this specific case, then we might as well say that the government should be able to put a unique tracking device on each one of us that we must always carry around. Many people would probably no want to be constantly tracked by the government openly, so why should we be okay with tracking us whenever they want, just without announcing it? We are afforded legal protections for most other private areas in our lives so why should we have almost no rights when it comes to something that we depend on and use every day?
I agree with the court decision to not dismiss the case because they were able to prevent the misuse and intent to sell drugs to other people. 2. The state did prove Stan’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the grounds of substantive criminal law and procedural criminal law. Although they had a credible source the defense called what the security officer said as “rumors”. The state was able to obtain a search
Protection against warrantless search and seizures is another protection the 4th Amendment provides. The government must get a warrant or court order from a federal judge before they can see who someone called, see how long the call was, and listen to the call. Apple is at war with the government because Apple encrypts everything on there phones, so no one else can see your personal information. There are reports written for public viewing when they are caught doing illegal and unconstitutional spying. The 4th Amendment also protects against destruction of personal property during a warrantless
In Katz v. United States, Charles Kats used a public telephone to phone-in illegal gambling bets. However, while placing these bets, Katz did not realize that the government was listening to his conversation. The FBI could listen to Katz place illegal bets because the agency tapped that specific phone. Following the recorded conversations, Katz was arrested and immediately taken into custody by the FBI. In response to the arrest, Charles Katz said the police had violated his rights as an American citizen; he claimed the FBI disrupted his right of privacy.
In 2009, Alonzo King, Jr. was arrested for violent assault charges and while in custody, the police took his DNA and logged into the Maryland DNA Database. His DNA was matched to the DNA in an unsolved rape case. The Maryland DNA Collection Act (MDCA) allows police officers to collect DNA samples of people under arrest for violent crimes or attempted violent crimes. However, in court, King appealed to have the conviction because the MDCA was against his IV amendment rights because his DNA was taken without a search warrant. The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed the conviction stating that the MDCA was infact unconstitutional, because King’s expectation of privacy was greater than the interest of Maryland in using DNA samples for the purpose of identification.
I still don’t agree to this because with the 4th amendment we have the right to privacy from the government, and that means all personal property can not get searched without the presence of a warrant. Also I love having my freedom with my phone and knowing that the government can check on anyone whenever they feel like you are a little weird so they check your personal
They tested DNA samples, examined cell phone records and used a sketch that was drawn by a neighbor in order to find the killer. Miami-Dade prosecutors have not released anymore details about the case. Juan Perez is the director of the Miami-Dade Police Department. He released a statement saying, "Turn yourself in, or we will come get you." The teen, whose name is Charles, was arrested at his home a few days later.
A month later there are police at his doorstep arresting him for the murder of the young man. He knew he was innocent so he requested a DNA test to set things straight.The police found fingerprints on the gun that belonged to another person who had actually committed the crime and he was set free. Penal Code 1405 was created for the convicted felons already in jail that have a reason to be found innocent. This policy was created specifically for California to get those innocent people out of jail. Others may claim that DNA evidence isn’t sufficient to convict someone for a crime or prove others innocent.