Terry V. Watson Case Analysis
In a decision made by the United States Supreme court, it was decided “that motor vehicles deserve a reduced expectation of privacy (Atkinson, 2011). This decision is in response to the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states that “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 the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” The case of Elliot Watson delves into why no warrant was needed to search the trunk of his car. The arrest of Mr. Watson and the search of his vehicle were valid. It was valid based on probable cause, which allows Officer Johnson to execute a warrantless search of the entire vehicle and all of the containers within. Carroll v. United States. There were a few examples given that would establish probable cause. Based on Terry v. Ohio, if an officer has reasonable suspicion that a person is about to commit a crime, the suspect may be detained and searched for weapons. In this case, it was Elliot Watson approaching the patrol car while the officer was running the …show more content…
Belton, allows an officer to search any area that belongs to the arrestee without a warrant. However, it is the Arizona v. Gant case, a ruling that put restrictions on Belton searches, that gives further evidence to the fact that the warrantless search of the trunk was valid. This case declared that a vehicle is allowed to be searched after an arrest only if “there is an ongoing threat to the safety and welfare of the police or the public.” Officer Johnson had reason to believe that Wanda Jones, the missing three-year-old girl, could be in the trunk of Elliot Watson’s sports car, and the officer was therefore allowed to search the trunk, believing there to be a threat to Wanda Jones’
Terry V. Ohio 392 Case Study
430 Words | 2 PagesName: Terry v. Ohio 392 US1 Supreme Court 1968 Facts: The incident occurred on October 31st 1963 at approximately 2:30pm in the afternoon. The police officer who was dressed in plain clothes was attracted by Terry and Chilton who were casing a store. With 30 years of prior experience in the area. The officer knew casing when he saw it. He had been assigned to that area specifically in search for shoplifters and pick pockets.
Hsc300 Unit 1 Assignment
344 Words | 2 PagesI had the female step out of the vehicle when she did I told her to get her bag as well, she said it was not her bag. At this time I removed the bag from the vehicle and sat it on the toolbox located on the bed of the vehicle. The female then went to speak with Officer Woodruff. I later took the bag to Officer Woodrufff while he was speaking with the female. At this time a computer check reveled that Green had several warrants.
The Fourth Amendment: The Threats In The United States
469 Words | 2 PagesThe 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.
Shakel Negligence Case Study
695 Words | 3 PagesAlthough, the police officers had a search warrant they had it for the wrong unit which placed a family in danger and they raided the wrong unit in the first place but then raided the right one where they find the evidence but because it was found illegally the judge dismissed all of the evidence against Shakeel “Blam” Wiggins because of the Exclusionary Rule. Now the reason the evidence was dismissed was because there was no specific address on the warrant and this means that an officer cannot just search every unit in the multi-family house until they find evidence against the
Arizona Vs Gant Case Study
860 Words | 4 PagesThe court also used Preston v. United States 376 U.S. 364, 367-368, 84 S. Ct. 881, 11 L. Ed. 2d 777 (1964). In Preston, the search-incident-to-arrest exception does not apply if the area where police officers want to search is not in any way accessible to the arrestee. The court also used New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454, 101 S. Ct. 2860, 69 L. Ed. 2d 768 (1981), which applies to vehicle searches, the court held that when an officer lawfully arrests “the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the passenger compartment of the automobile” and any containers
How Did Pc Williams Have The Power To Carry Out A Search
1612 Words | 7 PagesQuestion 4 (a): Did PC Williams have the power to carry out a search under s.1 PACE? According to (PACE Code, 1984), S.1 ss (1.1) states that ‘power to stop and search must be used fairly, responsibly with respect for people being searched and without discrimination.’ Therefore, referring to the facts of the case: ‘PC Williams’ thinks he recognises the youth as Patrick Jones based on the youth’s black scruffy looking and wearing a baseball cap. Added to that, his suspicion was based on the number of times that he has arrested Patrick Jones before for theft and burglary offences.’
Procedural History Of Antoine Jones
1082 Words | 5 PagesJones was protected by the constitution for unreasonable searches and seizures. The evidence obtained from the illegal search warrant was voided and was suppressed from being used in court against Jones. R2: By reaching into the interior of Jones’ vehicle, the court concluded that this act from law enforcement involved an unreasonable search. The police used an expired warrant to attach the GPS to Jones vehicle.
Supreme Court Case Of Ohio Terry V. Ohio
885 Words | 4 PagesIf the police were to conduct a search without a warrant or consent in this situation, any and all evidence found would be prohibited from use against the suspect in the court of law. This rule is called the exclusionary law, created under the Supreme Court ruling of Mapp v. Ohio (Mapp v. Ohio, 1961), states that any evidence that is illegally obtained during an investigation cannot be used in the court of
No Probable Cause To Arrest Hayes Essay
551 Words | 3 PagesWhere there was no probable cause to arrest Hayes, no consent to go to the police station, and no prior judicial authorization for detaining him, the investigative detention at the station for fingerprinting purposes violated Hayes rights under the Fourth Amendment, as made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment. Reasoning: The police without a warrant or probable cause removed a subject from his home and transported him to the police station, where he was not free to go, although he was there briefly for questioning, In addition fingerprinted him.
Professor Plum Case Summary
686 Words | 3 PagesThe evidentiary prong state that it is reasonable for an officer to believe that evidence relating to the crime arrested for can be found in the vehicle. The third way to search a car without a warrant is by using the automobile exception rule that resulted from Carroll V. United States. This rule states that officers can search a vehicle without a search warrant as long as they have probable cause to believe evidence or contraband is located in the vehicle (267 U.S. 132, 1925). Lastly, the inventory search of a car before it gets impounded. The only rule that can best justify the search of professor plums vehicle is the inventory search
Pros And Cons Of The Fourth Amendment
1842 Words | 8 PagesIn the Supreme Court relied on the rule of "good faith" holding that the evidence obtained by the officers conducting inquiries based on a "good faith" court order that is subsequently found to be deficient is also admissible. The evidence would also be unusable if the officer prepared a judicial order under a sworn statement in a dishonest or negligent manner, if the magistrate who granted it abandons his neutrality, or if the court order lacks sufficient specificity. The Leon case only applies to search warrants. It is not clear whether the "good faith" exception applies to court orders about inquiries in other contexts. The 8 of January of 1974 , the Supreme Court ruled that the decisions of a grand jury can be based on alleged illegal evidence obtained in the cross-examination of a witness, because to argue otherwise would interfere with the independence of the grand jury, and the time to request the illegality of a search is after the defendant is
Private Search Account: The Rowley Case
108 Words | 1 PagesProfessor Corley, I do believe in the private search document. With the Rowley case, I do believe it should apply. Since the father gave permission to come into the house and handed the officer the items willingly, I do believe that it was a legal search. Rowley had given his parents full permission to watch his belongings which meant that since the items were in the truck in the possession of the parents then it would have been a legal search. Also with his father willingly let the officer in and handed the items over to the officer wilingly then there was no need for a search
Warrantless Search
725 Words | 3 PagesThe shooters then used Riley’s Oldsmobile vehicle as a get away car. On August 22, 2009, Riley was pulled over by police while he was driving a different vehicle with expired license plates, along with Riley’s suspended drivers license. Law enforcement policy required that the vehicle be impounded. During an inventory search of the vehicle prior to being impounded, law enforcement officers located two guns and arrested Riley for possession of firearm. During Riley’s arraignment, officer seized and analyzed Riley’s cell phone.
Justifiable Vehicle Search
625 Words | 3 PagesVehicle searches are relatively new considering the rest of the laws that have been around since the beginning. There are a lot of rules that come into play to have a justifiable vehicle search. Each state also has their own personal laws in regards to vehicle searches as well. It is a tricky law, just like many others when it comes to what is considered a lawful search.
Case Study Of Ybarra Vs. Illinois
644 Words | 3 PagesOhio, 392 U.S. 1 (1969)) • The officer who conducted search on Ybarra provided no evidence that he believe he was armed and dangerous , the search of Ybarra was a violation of his constitutional rights and the decision of the lower courts were reversed • The decision was majority 6 justices to 3, the dissenting opinions were from Justice Rehnquist , Justice Blackmun and Justice Burger they argued that the search of the bar was necessary and the case presented a different set of circumstances to the Terry v Ohio suspicion standard stating that an officer is in more danger executing a warrant than making a standard police stop on the
More about Terry V. Watson Case Analysis
Terry V. Ohio 392 Case Study
430 Words | 2 PagesHsc300 Unit 1 Assignment
344 Words | 2 PagesThe Fourth Amendment: The Threats In The United States
469 Words | 2 PagesShakel Negligence Case Study
695 Words | 3 PagesArizona Vs Gant Case Study
860 Words | 4 PagesHow Did Pc Williams Have The Power To Carry Out A Search
1612 Words | 7 PagesProcedural History Of Antoine Jones
1082 Words | 5 PagesSupreme Court Case Of Ohio Terry V. Ohio
885 Words | 4 PagesNo Probable Cause To Arrest Hayes Essay
551 Words | 3 PagesProfessor Plum Case Summary
686 Words | 3 PagesPros And Cons Of The Fourth Amendment
1842 Words | 8 PagesPrivate Search Account: The Rowley Case
108 Words | 1 PagesWarrantless Search
725 Words | 3 PagesJustifiable Vehicle Search
625 Words | 3 PagesCase Study Of Ybarra Vs. Illinois
644 Words | 3 Pages