4 th Amendment Timothy Bian, Myris Kramsch, Mazen Elhosseiny, Daniel Alday, John Scott, Kartik Raju

“Each Man’s Home is His Castle” Secure in their persons, houses, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. Warrants only upon probable cause, particularly describing the place to be searched, and items to be seized.

Prevents unreasonable search and seizure practiced proliferate by the British government. Drafted by James Madison to sate anti-federalist need for defined government restrictions. A response to Tyranny

Weeks vs U.S. (1914) the threat of null and void

`1 Kansa Police entered into Fremont Weeks’ house and gathered evidence to convict him for transporti-ng lottery tickets. The Marshals trespassed and obtained evidence without a warrant.

Does this normalized practice violate the very body of the Fourth Amendment? hint: it does

The court understands it could render the Amendment null and void. Unanimous decision that this directly violates the 4 th Amendment. The sanctity of the 4 th upheld.

Mapp vs Ohio (1961) how pornography changed the constitution

Dollree Mapp was searched and arrested for illegal gambling apparatus. Mapp was found not guilty. However, during the search, pornographic magazines were found and Mapp was arrested and convicted.

Were the porno mags protected by the First Amendment? Can evidence unrelated to the warrant be seized to charge in a criminal proceeding?

The Exclusionary Rule The court ruled in favor of Mapp. The court finds the materials used to be illegally obtained. All illegally obtained materials are inadmissible in court.

Katz vs U.S. (1967) no loopholes around the law

Olmstead v. U.S. (1928) states that wiretapping is legal in investigations. Supreme Court rules eavesdropping legal unless it violates “unreasonable searches and seizures”. A Little History…

Charles Katz is charged with conducting illegal gambling operations over state lines. Federal agents placed warrantless wiretaps on public phone booth that he used. Congress pass Federal Communications Act. Silverman v. U.S. (1961) refines Olmstead doctrine

Does the warrantless wiretapping of a public phone booth violate the unreasonable search and seizure clause of the 4th Amendment ?

The Court ruled in favor of Katz: Tapping of public phone booth is unreasonable search in violation of 4 th. Since Katz, law enforcement must apply for a court’s permission to use electronic surveillance.

U.S. vs Leon (1984) to serve with good faith

Drug surveillance case from 1981 in Burbank, California. Police observed homes, followed cars, and used surveillance to acquire warrants. Evidence against Leon & Castillo found.

Should the evidence be upheld since the officers acted in “good faith?”

Evidence upheld because police relied on search warrant authority They acted in “good faith” believing that the warrant was valid Evidence upheld because police relied on search warrant authority. They acted in “good faith” believing that the warrant was valid. Established the “good faith” exception to the exclusionary rule from Mapp v. Ohio (1961).

Ciraolo vs California (1986) the cops were soaring high

Police flew over house to identify Marijuana plants in Ciraolo’s backyard after an anonymous tip. Carlo Ciraolo convicted of cultivating marijuana.

Was the unwarranted flyover of Mr. Ciraolo’s yard a violation of his 4th Amendment rights and privacy?

A divided court states that the observations from the cops did not violate the constitution. Sets the precedent that if its Nonintrusive, or is in public, then its consistent with the 4 th. 5 4

California vs Greenwood (1988) When “Green” came up against the Supreme

Stracner heard rumors about Greenwood. She then talked to the neighborhood garbage man. Arrested Greenwood with arrested and searched with a warrant.

Does the fourth amendment protect people when they are on public property?

Trash could be “readily accessed by other members of the public” The fourth amendment does not protect people when dealing with public property

Thank You