Illegal Search and Seizure

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides one of the most essential protections for individuals by prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures. This protection is a cornerstone of American civil liberties, ensuring that government authorities, including law enforcement, respect personal privacy and adhere to legal procedures when investigating criminal activity.

When a search or seizure is conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment, it is deemed “illegal” or “unconstitutional,” and any evidence obtained as a result may be excluded from court proceedings under the exclusionary rule.

The Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

This language reflects the legal intent to protect citizens from arbitrary and invasive actions by government officials. At the core of this amendment is the requirement that searches and seizures be “reasonable,” which typically means that law enforcement officers must obtain a warrant based on probable cause before conducting a search or seizure.

There are, however, important exceptions to this general rule that are outlined after we take a look at what constitutes and illegal search and seizure, from the point of view of expert federal criminal defense attorney Nate Crowley.

What Constitutes an Illegal Search and Seizure?

An illegal search and seizure occur when law enforcement officers conduct a search or confiscate property without a valid search warrant, probable cause, or an applicable exception (listed below in the next section titled Exception ) to the warrant requirement. The key elements of determining whether a search is illegal include:

1. Lack of a Warrant: In most cases, a warrant must be issued by a judge or magistrate based on probable cause that crime has been committed, and the warrant must specifically describe the place to be searched and the items or persons to be seized. A search conducted without a warrant, or with a warrant that is overly broad, can be deemed illegal.
2. No Probable Cause: Probable cause means there is a reasonable belief, based on facts, that a crime has occurred or that evidence of a crime will be found in the place to be searched. If a warrant is issued or a search is conducted without probable cause, the search may be ruled unconstitutional.
3. Exceeding the Scope of the Warrant: Even if law enforcement has a valid warrant, the search must be limited to the specific area and items described in the warrant. If officers go beyond what the warrant authorizes, any evidence obtained may be considered unlawfully seized.
4. Search Incident to Arrest: When someone is lawfully arrested, police can search the individual and the immediate area around them without a warrant. However, this type of search is limited in scope, and any overreach can be challenged as illegal.

Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement

While the general rule is that a warrant is required for searches and seizures, several exceptions have been recognized by the courts:

• Consent: If a person voluntarily consents to a search, law enforcement may conduct the search without a warrant. However, the consent must be freely given, and not the result of coercion or duress.
• Plain View: If officers are lawfully present and see contraband or evidence of a crime in plain view, they may seize it without a warrant.
• Exigent Circumstances exigent circumstances: In emergency situations, such as when there is an immediate threat to public safety or the possibility of evidence being destroyed, law enforcement may conduct a search without a warrant.
• Automobile Exception: Because vehicles can easily be moved, the courts have held that officers may search a vehicle without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe it contains evidence of a crime.

The Exclusionary Rule

If a search or seizure is deemed illegal, the exclusionary rule comes into play. Under this rule, any evidence obtained through an illegal search or seizure is inadmissible in court. This means that the prosecution cannot use the illegally obtained evidence to convict the defendant, which can significantly impact the outcome of a case.

In addition, the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine extends this protection by excluding not only the primary evidence obtained during an illegal search but also any secondary evidence (also known as best evidence) derived from the initial illegality.

The prohibition against illegal searches and seizures serves as a critical check on the power of government authorities. The Fourth Amendment’s protections ensure that individuals’ privacy is respected, and that law enforcement operates within the bounds of the law.

By understanding the rules surrounding search and seizure, citizens can better protect their rights, and those accused of crimes can request that their lawyer challenge any evidence obtained that was in violation of their constitutional protections. This is why it is so important to have a federal criminal attorney that comprehends the full spectrum of defenses inherent in the U.S. Constitution.

Illegal Search And Seizure? Contact Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer Nate Crowley.

Fill out our contact form on the Home Page https://www.natecrowleylaw.com/
Phone (619) 202-8188 OR email admin@crowleycrowleylaw.com