Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The reasonable expectation of privacy is crucial in distinguishing a legitimate, reasonable police search and seizure from an unreasonable one. A "search" occurs for purposes of the Fourth Amendment when the Government violates a person's "reasonable expectation of privacy". [3] In Katz v.
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 ...
Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927 (1995), is a United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court held that the traditional, common-law-derived "knock and announce" rule for executing search warrants must be incorporated into the "reasonableness" analysis of whether the actual execution of the warrant is/was justified under the 4th Amendment.
The "special needs" exception is an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s general requirement that government searches be supported by a warrant and probable cause. [1] The exception applies when (1) the government conducts programmatic searches that are primarily aimed at advancing some special need other than criminal law enforcement, and (2) the government’s search program is reasonable ...
Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of police sobriety checkpoints.The Court held 6-3 that these checkpoints met the Fourth Amendment standard of "reasonable search and seizure."
In constitutional and administrative law, reasonableness is a lens through which courts examine the constitutionality or lawfulness of legislation and regulation. [12] [13] [14] According to Paul Craig, it is "concerned with review of the weight and balance accorded by the primary decision-maker to factors that have been or can be deemed relevant in pursuit of a prima facie allowable purpose".
In United States constitutional law and criminal procedure, the good-faith exception (also good-faith doctrine) is one of the limitations on the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment. [ 1 ] For criminal proceedings, the exclusionary rule prohibits entry of evidence obtained through an unreasonable search and seizure , such as one executed ...
The Court cited policy reasons for preserving the open fields rule, stating that "open fields do not provide the setting for those intimate activities that the Amendment is intended to shelter from government interference or surveillance." Id at 178.