Tags: Sherwood Anderson And EssaysHuman Computer Interaction Research PapersReferencing Dissertations Apa StyleParchment Paper For WritingKindergarten Monthly Homework CalendarPowerpoint ThesisEssay Fairylore NewHow To Do Citations In A Research Paper
The 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments provide much of the constitutional basis of these rights.
The purpose of the 4th Amendment is to deny the national government the authority to make general searches and seizures of property.
A major issue over the years has been the interpretation of "unreasonable" searches and seizures. They also change often, but the general principle is that searches are valid methods of enforcing law and order, but unreasonable searches are prohibited.
Now local police departments must issue warnings known as "Miranda Rights" to people that they arrest.
A very important principle related to the 4th and 5th Amendments is the exclusionary rule, which upholds the principle that evidence gathered illegally cannot be used in a trial.
Review questions: (1962) The Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures and requires two branches of government to agree in order for search warrants to be issued. With this ruling, the Court established the exclusionary rule for federal cases: evidence seized in violation of the Constitution may not be used at trial.
But what happens when the police do not act within the law and conduct searches without a warrant? In a series of cases, the Court was asked to consider whether criminal defendants’ convictions could stand if illegally-seized evidence was used against them in Court. Among the early critics of the exclusionary rule was Appeals Court Judge Benjamin Cardozo.
Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence.
Our decision, founded on reason and truth, gives to the individual no more than that which the Constitution guarantees him, to the police officer no less than that to which honest law enforcement is entitled, and, to the courts, that judicial integrity so necessary in the true administration of justice.
Cardozo famously objected in 1926, “The criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered.” About thirty-five years later in 1949, the Court declined to apply the exclusionary rule to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, reasoning that states could use other methods of ensuring due process of law. Ohio reached the Court in 1961, it was not initially seen as a Fourth Amendment case.
Dollree Mapp was convicted under Ohio law for possessing “lewd, lascivious, or obscene material.” Mapp appealed her conviction.