1 / 7

Fourth Amendment Rights

Fourth Amendment Rights. “The young man knows the rules, but the old* man knows the exceptions.” Oliver Wendell Holmes *Please note that some of us prefer “wise” or perhaps “experienced”. Boyd v. United States (1886).

yori
Télécharger la présentation

Fourth Amendment Rights

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Fourth Amendment Rights “The young man knows the rules, but the old* man knows the exceptions.” Oliver Wendell Holmes *Please note that some of us prefer “wise” or perhaps “experienced”.

  2. Boyd v. United States (1886) • The Good: Forcible removal of one’s papers to be used as evidence is not permitted under the Fourth Amendment. • The Bad: Only applied to searches involving “forcible and compulsory extortion” and only applied to evidence used in criminal trials.

  3. Weeks v. United States (1914) • The Good: This decision established the exclusionary rule, which prohibited police from using illegally obtained evidence in trials. • The Bad: This ruling only applied the exclusionary rule to federal officials. The decision was not applied to states.

  4. Wolf v. Colorado (1949) • The Good: The Court made the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applicable to the states, which then made the Fourth Amendment applicable as well. • The Bad: The Court said specifically that the exclusionary rule WAS NOT applicable to the states because it was not expressly stated as a remedy for a bad search.

  5. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) • The Good: Fixed the Wolf decision and applied the exclusionary rule to the states. Police must have “reasonable suspicion” or “probable cause” and follow rules in gathering evidence. • The Bad: Many gray areas and exceptions remain, such as…

  6. New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) • ". . . The warrant requirement, in particular, is unsuited to the school environment . . . [T]he legality of a search of a student should depend simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search . . . Such a search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction. "—Justice Byron White, speaking for the majority • Translated: The Court established more lenient standards for reasonableness in school searches.

  7. U.S. v. Leon (1984)Good Faith Exception • An exception to the exclusionary rule. • Illegally gathered evidence can be admitted at trial if police officers have reason to believe they have a valid warrant or reason to search. • Previously, police were responsible for “bad searches”. • So far the new rule has been confined to errors made by judges or legislatures. Example: if a judge makes a mistake in issuing a warrant, the police officer is not responsible if she had good reason to believe that the warrant was valid.

More Related