Toggle navigation
Home
Ask A Question
Answer Questions
Users
Support/FAQ
Login
Register
Preview 50% of the Answer Below
Due to formatting, images, tables, or paragraphs may be out of place or not shown. Rest assured that they will be included and formatted correctly in your purchased answer.
Details
Question Title:
must equal up to 1200 words with intext citation
Go Back to the Question
Answer Preview
</p> <p>Prior to this 1967, the interpretation of the Fourth Amendment was that it protected "areas", however, in Katz v. the United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment was intended to protect people and not areas. The Court also created a test consisting of two parts, called the Katz "reasonable expectation of privacy". The first of the test is that the person in question must have a subjective expectation of privacy and the second is that the expectation must be objectively XXXXXXXXXX. XXX XXXX XX XXXXX used today XX XXXXXXXXX XX a XXXXX XXXXXX XXX seizure XXXX occurred (Hall, XXXX).</p> <p> </p> <p>X. What XXX the XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXX obtaining a XXXXXX warrant? </p> <p> </p> <p>Search XXXXXXXX are XXXX issued XXX judges and XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX law enforcement officers XXXX XXXXX through sworn statements that there is probable XXXXX to XXXXXXX a XXXXXX is XXXXXXXXX. In XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX must explicitly state XXX location XX the search XXX what exactly is being XXXXXX. It should be noted XXXX XXXXXX may XXXXX a XXXXXXXXXXX XX how XXX XXXX a XXX enforcement XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXX a search (Carlson, 2016). An example XX XXX a XXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXX be precise XX XXXXX in XXX case XX XXXXX Hanson XXX XXX brother XXX XXXXXX. In 2014, XXX enforcement officers had a surveillance set up XX watch XXX XXXXXX's home believing XXX XXXX was a place for drug activity. XXXXX was a raid on the home and the XXXXXXXX were charged with several XXXXXXXX, however, XXXXXXX XXX officer, Detective XXX Rotunno, XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX, XXX charges were XXXXXXX (XXXXXXX, XXXX).</p> <p>XXXXX are XXXXXXX emergency situations XXXX XX XXX require a warrant. XXX example, in Wayne v. XXX XXXXXX States (1963), XXXXXX broke XXXX a home XXXXX XXXXXXXXX an emergency call XXX a woman XXX XXX XXXX as the result of a XXXXXXX abortion. XXX XXXXXXXXX in the XXXX XXXXXXX that XXX evidence XXXXX in XXX home, including the XXXXXXXX victim, XXXXXX XXX XX XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXX law enforcement officers XXXXXXX without a XXXXXX warrant. XXXXX XXXXXXX Burger, who XXX then a judge, stated, "X warrant XX XXX required XX break XXXX a XXXX XX XXXXX a XXXXXXX XXXX XX rescue occupants or extinguish a XXXX, to XXXXXXX a XXXXXXXX or XX bring emergency XXX to an XXXXXXX person. XXX XXXX to XXXXXXX or preserve life or XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXXXXX for what would XX otherwise XXXXXXX XXXXXX an XXXXXXXX or XXXXXXXXX" (XXXXXX, 2017). XX this case, an XXXXXXXXX call was received with XXX information that XXXXXXX’s life may be in danger. When the XXXXXX XXXXXXX, they XXXXXXX XX the door for a long period of XXXX XXX XXXXXXXXX who they XXXX, therefore, XXX police having the knowledge that XXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX had every XXXXX to make an entrance into XXX home XXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXX a search XXXXXXX.</p> <p>X. XXXXX was subsequently XXXXXXX with XXXXXXXXX burglary XXX possession of XXXXXXXX tools. XX has filed a XXXXXX XX XXXXXXXX the tools and diagram, XX XXXX as a motion to dismiss. Should XXX motions XX XXXXXXX? XXXXXXX.</p> <p>No, XXXXX’s motions XXXXXX not XX granted XXXXXXX the XXX enforcement officer met XXX requirement of XXXXXX and seizure by way of XXXXXXXX XXXXX and reasonable suspicion. XXXXXXXXX to our XXXX, probable XXXXX XX XXX XXXXXXX amount XX evidence XXXXXXXXX for a XXXXXX, seizure, or XXXXXX to XX XXXXXX under XXX Fourth Amendment. Probable cause is not a requirement; XXXXXXX, law enforcement XXXX have a XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX the XXXXXXXXXX XXX already XXXXXXXXX a XXXXX, is in XXX process XX conducting a crime or XXX intentions XX XXXXXX a crime (XXXX, 2015). The XXXXXXX’s XXXXXX XX validated XXXXXXXXX XX XXX XXXXXX in Terry XX. XXXX (1968).</p> <p>XXX case began in 1963 when XXX XXXXXXXXXXX detective Martin XXXXXXXX witnessed XXX XXXXXXXXX, John XXXXX, XXX Richard Chilton, who was acting suspiciously in XXXXX XX a store XXXX a XXXXX man appeared, stayed XXXXXXX XXX then left. XXXXX watching XXX suspects XXX a while, XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX they XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XX XXX the XXXXX, so he approached them, identified XXXXXXX as a law enforcement officer XXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX were doing, to XXXXX they XXXXXXX something XXXXX their XXXXXX. XX that XXXX, McFadden began XX frisk each man XXX found XXXX two XX the XXXXX suspects XXXX carrying XXXXXXX. XXXXX was XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX of a XXXXXXXXX weapon, which he XXXXXXXX claiming XXX search violated XXX Fourth XXXXXXXXX right. XX XXX XXX of XXX case, the XX Supreme Court XXXX that the search XXX valid XXXXXXX XXX officer XXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX a XXXXX XXX XXXXX to XX XXXXXXXXX (Kemp, n.d.).</p> <p>XX XXXX case, XXXXX was observed XX the officer XXX a XXXXXX XX 5 XXXXXXX just standing behind the XXXXX and XXX "walking" XX he claimed XX XX XXXXX. I XXXX XXXX would be valid XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXX the officer XXX XXXXX XXXXXX his rights XX XXXXXX the offender. XXXXXXX, XXXXX on XXX observances XX the XXXXXXX, he XXX XXXXXX to believe XXXX XXXXX was going to burglarize the XXXXX, XXXXXXX XXXX XXX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXX within compliance to XXXXXX XXX XXXXX XX Tommy’s person.</p> <p>4. XXXXXX XX a XXXXXXX in an embezzlement investigation. XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX that she XXX XXXXXX evidence in her XXXXXXXX's house, without XXX XXXXXXXX's consent. XXX XXXXXXXX XXXX not XXXXXXX to a XXXXXX. XXX XXX police obtain a XXXXXX warrant XXX the non-XXXXXXX's XXXX?</p> <p>Because XXXXXX's XXXXXXXX would XX XXXXXXXXXX a XXXXX-XXXXXX XXXXX, law XXXXXXXXXXX must XXXXXX a warrant before a XXXXXX and seizure could XX XXXXXXXXX (XXXX, 2015). In XXXXXXXX XX. the United XXXXXX (XXXX), it was determined that an arrest warrant XXXXX XX not enough for XXXXXXXX to enter a third-party residence. XX January 14, 1978, an informant for XXX Detroit, XXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX a XXXXX drug dealer, XXXXX Lyons, could possibly be XXXXX in XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX. Atlanta XXX enforcement officers, XXXX an XXXXXX XXXXXXX for XXXXX, XXXXXX XX at XXX home XX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXX did a search of the XXXX XXXXXXXXX in the discovery of what they XXXXXXXX XX XX cocaine. XXXXX their discovery, XXXX XXXXXXXX a XXXXXX warrant XXX XXX residence XXX continued their search ultimately XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX and XXXXX XXXX paraphernalia. Steagald was arrested and XXXXXXXXX a XXXXX XXXXX he XXXXX to XXXXXXXX the evidence that officers found XXXXX XX getting the XXXXXXX XXX his XXXXXXXXX. XXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXX XXXXXX that XXX arrest warrant XXX XXX XXX XXXXXX of Lyons XXX did XXX cover XXX XXXXXX of XXXXXXXXX home (XXXX Keith Steagald, n.d.).</p> <p>XX Stacey’s XXXX, XXX XXXXXXXX XXX XX XXXX that Stacey XXX evidence in XXXXX home, so I XXX XXX XXX it doesn’t seem feasible XX XXXXX law enforcement to conduct a XXXXXX. XX order XXX officers to gain access to XXX home, they XXXXX XXXX to obtain a search warrant XX XXX of XXXXXXXXXX XX the XXXXX or XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX what the warrant XX XXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX XX XXXXXXXX XXX XXXX they expect XX find. It XX then up to the judge or XXXXXXXXXX to determine whether a search XXXXXXX XXXXXX be XXXXXX (XXXXXXX, XXXX). </p> <p>XXXXXXXXX</p> <p>Astolfi, C. (XXXX, XXXXXXX 14). XXXX XXXXXXXXX, an XXXXXX released XXX XX a XXX search warrant. Retrieved XXXXX XX, 2018, from <a href="http://www.sanduskyregister.com/XXXXX/201610140035">XXXX://XXX.sanduskyregister.com/story/201610140035</a> </p> <p>Carlson, D. (XXXX, XXXX 16). Search XXXXXXX. XXXXXXXXX XXXXX 31, XXXX, XXXX <a href="https://www.XXX.cornell.edu/XXX/search_warrant">XXXXX://www.law.XXXXXXX.XXX/wex/search_warrant</a> </p> <p>Gary XXXXX STEAGALD, XXXXXXXXXX, v. UNITED STATES. (n.d.). XXXXXXXXX March 31, XXXX, XXXX <a XXXX="https://www.law.XXXXXXX.XXX/supremecourt/XXXX/451/204">https://www.law.XXXXXXX.edu/XXXXXXXXXXXX/text/451/204</a> </p> <p>XXXX, X. E. (2015). Criminal law and XXXXXXXXX (7th ed.). New XXXX: XXXXXXX Learning. </p> <p>XXXXXXXX, N. (2016, XXXXXXXX XX). XXXX v. XXX United States: XXX XXXXXX Amendment adapts to new technology. Retrieved March 31, 2018, XXXX <a href="XXXXX://constitutioncenter.XXX/XXXX/XXXX-v-XXXXXX-XXXXXX-the-XXXXXX-XXXXXXXXX-adapts-to-new-technology/">XXXXX://XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.XXX/blog/katz-v-united-states-the-XXXXXX-amendment-XXXXXX-XX-new-XXXXXXXXXX/</a> </p> <p>Kemp, X. (n.d.). XXXXX v. XXXX, 392 U.S. X (XXXX). XXXXXXXXX XXXXX XX, 2018, from <a href="https://XXXXXXX.XXXXXX.com/XXXXX/federal/us/392/1/case.XXXX">XXXXX://XXXXXXX.justia.com/XXXXX/federal/us/392/X/XXXX.XXXX</a> </p> <p>Pettry, M. X. (XXXX, XXXXXXXXX XX). Legal Digest: XXX XXXXXXXXX XXX Exception XX XXX Fourth Amendments XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX. Retrieved XXXXX XX, 2018, from <a XXXX="XXXXX://XXX.XXX.XXX/articles/XXXXX-XXXXXX/XXXXX-digest-XXX-emergency-aid-exception-XX-the-fourth-amendments-XXXXXXX-requirement">https://XXX.fbi.gov/articles/XXXXX-XXXXXX/legal-XXXXXX-XXX-XXXXXXXXX-aid-exception-XX-the-XXXXXX-XXXXXXXXXX-wa...</a> </p> <p>XXX state XX XXXX vs. XXXXXX Terry (XXXX 10, XXXX) </p> <p>XXXXXXXX v. the XXXXXX States. (1981). XXXX. Retrieved March 31, XXXX, XXXX <a href="https://XXX.XXXX.org/cases/XXXX/79-6777">https://XXX.oyez.org/cases/1980/XX-XXXX</a> </p> <p> </p>">
Attachment #1 Preview
Attachment #2 Preview
