Hypothetical Case Paper

Hypothetical case: “James Smith was arrested for burglarizing his next door neighbor's apartment in the state of California. And without the benefit of a warrant, the neighbor, who is a friend of Mr. Smith, forced open the front door to Mr. Smith's apartment and saw his property (Constitutional Law, 2014). The neighbor called the police, and they immediately arrested Mr. Smith for burglary and possession of stolen property out of fear that he would get rid of the property before they returned with a search warrant (Constitutional Law, 2014). Mr. Smith's conviction in the state and federal courts were upheld, and it is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. Prepare the Court's response to this constitutional challenge that Mr. Smith was denied equal protection under the law” (Constitutional Law, 2014).

As acting “Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court” it is felt that a deeper understanding of equal protection under the law will give insight on why Mr. Smith was denied the rights to the protection in the state and federal courts. Let’s began by looking into the history of the “equal protection under the law” than there will be a better understanding of the decision issued down too Mr. Smith. Equal Protection clause was passed

He then petition the courts for the return of his property. Court unanimously held that the rights of the accused was violated when the officer enter the private residence without a warrant and seizure his personal property (Cornell University Law School, n.d). As a remedy to the direct violation U.S. Constitution Fourth Amendment by law enforcement the courts refused to allow the evidence seized to be present in the court case against the accused (Mr. Weeks) (Cornell University Law School, n.d). This believed to be the first the exclusionary rule” was used in the court of