Introduction
The Fourth Amendment states that “the rights of the people to be secured in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported, by the oath of affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.” This simply means in laments terms that every US citizens is entitled and promised protections against personal and property invasion as well as entitled to be inform of the nature of the search and detailed what place and things are subject to be searched. The fourth amendments also lays out a requirement that a warrant must be obtained and must be done so only …show more content…
Dickerson. Both cases show a shed light in part as to what the courts feel about first the use of warrants and secondly what type of information can be obtained and how it can be obtained. Lastly cases like Terry v. Ohio , established the term” protective pat-down”, which allowed officers to pat down suspects if given reasonable suspicion and probable cause which further established legal boundaries . These in short were just a beginning look into a few of the courts ruling and how based on those todays take on the fourth amendment and the collection of evidence it is different. The legal boundaries within these two cases detail what the courts found to be in error and In conclusion the precedents established within each case are what make up the legal boundaries when conducting a search and seizure under constitutional law. Each cases has been built on further in efforts to continue to protect the rights of each and every US citizen. As an acting cop or lawyer you must continue to study your constitution and strive to protect those rights of those in which you dedicated under oath to protect. These cases furthermore show you how one wrong mishap and/or errors could tear apart a case that you work so hard to put together. The fourth amendment as well as its current cases law makes it clear both what is acceptable and what is not. When in doubt refer to your constitution and own moral compass, with the help of both of we as a legal community should start to less and less cases involving the violation of 4th amendment
The Fourth Amendment states that “the rights of the people to be secured in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported, by the oath of affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.” This simply means in laments terms that every US citizens is entitled and promised protections against personal and property invasion as well as entitled to be inform of the nature of the search and detailed what place and things are subject to be searched. The fourth amendments also lays out a requirement that a warrant must be obtained and must be done so only …show more content…
Dickerson. Both cases show a shed light in part as to what the courts feel about first the use of warrants and secondly what type of information can be obtained and how it can be obtained. Lastly cases like Terry v. Ohio , established the term” protective pat-down”, which allowed officers to pat down suspects if given reasonable suspicion and probable cause which further established legal boundaries . These in short were just a beginning look into a few of the courts ruling and how based on those todays take on the fourth amendment and the collection of evidence it is different. The legal boundaries within these two cases detail what the courts found to be in error and In conclusion the precedents established within each case are what make up the legal boundaries when conducting a search and seizure under constitutional law. Each cases has been built on further in efforts to continue to protect the rights of each and every US citizen. As an acting cop or lawyer you must continue to study your constitution and strive to protect those rights of those in which you dedicated under oath to protect. These cases furthermore show you how one wrong mishap and/or errors could tear apart a case that you work so hard to put together. The fourth amendment as well as its current cases law makes it clear both what is acceptable and what is not. When in doubt refer to your constitution and own moral compass, with the help of both of we as a legal community should start to less and less cases involving the violation of 4th amendment