Fourth Amendment Assignment

1. Answer the following questions in essay form.

Can a police officer search your house if they want to? Explain. How have the court
cases you read about given us insight to our Fourth Amendment rights? What rights
are protected under the Fourth Amendment? Explain why this law is important for
everyday law-abiding citizens.

The Fourth Amendment requires that in order for a police officer, to search a person's home or
personal items, he must obtain a search warrant signed by a judge. However, under the Fourth
Amendment police may engage in reasonable searches. For a search to be "reasonable," law
enforcement generally must have adequate reason to believe that evidence of a crime will be
found there. This is referred to as probable cause. Probable cause for arrest exists when facts
and circumstances within the police officer's knowledge would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.

In the Weeks v. United States case, police officers found a hidden key and entered into Mr.
Weeks house to do a search without a warrant. They took papers, letters, and some other items,
for later use in court as evidence. Mr. Weeks was found guilty based on the evidence collected
from his home but he asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. The judgment of the
district court was reversed. The evidence collected during the illegal search was in violation of
the Fourth Amendment and was thus inadmissible at the trial.

There are certain exceptions to the Fourth Amendment right to have a properly executed search
warrant issued before a search or seizure of private property can be conducted. The Supreme
Court has ruled that, for example, a police officer may conduct a pat-down search of someone
he has observed engaging in suspicious behavior, if he has reasonable suspicion that some
crime is being committed. Also, if a police officer observes someone committing a crime, or
believes that he has probable cause to suspect someone has committed a crime, he may arrest
the person without a warrant.

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects personal privacy, and every citizen's
right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion into their persons, homes, businesses,
and property, whether through police stops of citizens on the street, arrests, or searches of
homes and businesses. The Fourth Amendment only provides protection from illegal search and
seizure by government officials, not by private citizens. So, if an employer unreasonably
searched your possessions at work, the Fourth Amendment would not have been violated. The
degree of protection available in a particular case depends on the nature of the detention or
arrest, the characteristics of the place searched, and the circumstances under which the search
takes place.

This law is important because it protects people from inappropriate searches and seizures of
both themselves and their property. Otherwise, police and other government officials could walk
into your home and arrest you or take your stuff without any basis to do so.

This study source was downloaded by 100000797918458 from CourseHero.com on 07-13-2022 11:27:40 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/134692124/Fourth-Amendment-Assignmentdocx/
 2. Explain the rulings of each of the 3 court cases. Address the following questions in
your essay.
Explain each case in your own words and how each case was affected by the Fourth
Amendment? Do you agree with each of the court decisions? Explain your answer. If
this happened at your school, how would you feel? Do you agree with the Fourth
Amendment rights? How would your Fourth Amendment rights protect you in these
situations?

In the first case, New Jersey v. T.L.O. a 14-year old girl was caught smoking in the bathroom at
school. The student denied smoking but when the assistant vice principal demanded and
searched her purse, found a pack of cigarettes, rolling papers, marijuana, a pipe, plastic bags, a
large amount of money, and a list of students who owed her money. The evidence was used by
the New Jersey Juvenile Court to find her guilty of delinquency.

She appealed, and the second time the New Jersey Supreme Court reversed, saying the search
was unreasonable and the evidence must be suppressed. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the
New Jersey Supreme Court, holding that school officials can search a student if they have
reasonable suspicion.

I agree with the U.S. Supreme Court decision that school officials can search if they have
reasonable suspicion. If a case like this happens at my school I would agree with it because
school officials are the authority and we have to respect and follow the rules. Students do have
4th Amendment rights at school, but they are balanced with the school’s responsibility to
maintain a safe and educational environment. School officials do not need to have probable
cause or obtain a search warrant.

The second case is the Vernonia School District v. Acton, in this case, a school district adopted a
policy authorizing random drug testing of student-athletes. This policy was adopted because
there was a known drug problem in the school district and most were athletes students the
drug users and dealers. James Acton, a 7th grader, refused the testing, and his parents refused to
consent to the testing. Because of this, he was not allowed to participate in football.

I agree with the decision, the drug testing policy is reasonable and does not violate the 4 th
Amendment rights of the students. I agree with not letting the student participate in football
since he and his parents refused to the drug testing. There was a drug problem at that school
district, so they had to take other security measures for the safety of the rest of the school. If a
situation like this happens at my school I would feel safe and agree to those measures. I would
not mind taking drug tests if I am an athlete. We as students have 4th Amendment rights at
school, but they are balanced with the school’s responsibility to maintain a safe and educational
environment.

This study source was downloaded by 100000797918458 from CourseHero.com on 07-13-2022 11:27:40 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/134692124/Fourth-Amendment-Assignmentdocx/
 The third case is the Safford Unified School District v. Redding, in this case, a male student
reported that another girl, Marissa Glines, had given him a prescription-strength ibuprofen
pill. A search of Marissa’s day planner and pockets revealed more of the pills and some
weapons. Marissa then reported the day planner belonged to Savana Redding, and that Savana
had given her the pills. Savana was then searched, a search which included not only her
backpack and pockets but also inside her undergarments.

The student’s rights were violated because school officials should not proceed to do a strip
search. They had reasonable suspicion to think that Redding was involved since the other girl
accused her to be the owner of those illegal things, but they should never proceed with a strip
search to a minor. The strip search by school officials, in this case, was not legal. It was
unreasonable considering the nature of the offense and the facts of the case.

This study source was downloaded by 100000797918458 from CourseHero.com on 07-13-2022 11:27:40 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/134692124/Fourth-Amendment-Assignmentdocx/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)