Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Bill of Rights in the National Archives. The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights.It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets requirements for issuing warrants: warrants must be issued by a judge or magistrate, justified by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and must particularly describe the place to be ...
Dareton police search the vehicle of a suspected drug smuggler in Wentworth, in the state of New South Wales, Australia, near the border with Victoria.. Search and seizure is a procedure used in many civil law and common law legal systems by which police or other authorities and their agents, who, suspecting that a crime has been committed, commence a search of a person's property and ...
In this case, where federal agents had probable cause to search a hotel room but did not obtain a warrant, the Court declared the search was "unreasonable." [ 1 ] Johnson is commonly cited for the proposition that the Fourth Amendment creates a "warrant requirement" for searches, and warrantless searches are " per se unreasonable."
The Texas Constitution says: “The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions, from all unreasonable seizures or searches, and no warrant to search any place, or to ...
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects against unreasonable search and seizure. Originally, remote surveillance of a person's communications, such as a telephone call, was not considered search and seizure without an "actual physical invasion" of a defendant's property. [1]
The meaning of seizure is fairly straightforward. In R. v. Dyment (1988), [17] the Supreme Court defined it simply as the "taking of a thing from a person by a public authority without that person's consent." This meaning has been narrowed to cover property taken in furtherance of administration or criminal investigation (Quebec (Attorney ...
The US Supreme Court reversed the Appeals Court ruling in a 5–3 decision. Writing for the majority, Justice Sherman Minton wrote that only "unreasonable" searches were banned under the Fourth Amendment; searching the office of a suspected forger at the site of his lawful arrest was held to be reasonable.
Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886) was a decision by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that "a search and seizure [was] equivalent [to] a compulsory production of a man's private papers" and that the search was "an 'unreasonable search and seizure' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment."