Fourth Amendment Cases

The defendant was the leading figure in a major
conspiracy. The government, observing that the defendant appeared to conduct some of his illegal business through the means of a telephone, tapped the telephone to his home and office. In doing so, the officers refrained from entering onto the defendant’s property, using the public street near his home. These wiretaps generated much of the evidence against the defendant.

Did the government conduct a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment?

No. The Fourth Amendment protects “persons, houses papers and effects,” none of which were implicated here.

FBI agents overheard conversations of the defendant
by attaching an electronic listening and recording device to the outside of a public telephone booth from which he had placed his calls. The defendant was charged with transmitting wagering information out of state. At the trial, the court permitted the government to introduce evidence of the defendant’s end of telephone conversations.

Did the agents’ actions amount to a Fourth Amendment search?

Yes. The agents conducted a Fourth Amendment search

The government attached a global positioning device
(GPS) to the defendant’s vehicle as it was parked on a public parking lot. The defendant was the exclusive driver of this vehicle. The government learned of the travel patterns of the defendant for the next 28 days. Some of this information led to his indictment for drug trafficking.

Was the government’s attachment of the GPS to
the defendant’s vehicle a “search?”

Yes. A Fourth Amendment “search” occurs when the government trespasses on a person, house, paper, or effect for the purpose of gathering information

The defendant, a fourteen-year-old student, was
found smoking cigarettes in a public high school bathroom. She was taken to the vice-principal’s office. He asked the defendant to come into his private office and demanded to see her purse. Opening the purse, he found a pack of cigarettes. As he reached into the purse for the cigarettes, the vice-principal also noticed a
package of cigarette rolling papers. Suspecting that a closer examination of the purse might yield further evidence of drug use, the vice-principal thoroughly searched it. He found several pieces of evidence that implicated the defendant in marijuana dealing.

Was the intrusion of the defendant’s purse by a
public high school administrator a Fourth
Amendment search?

Yes. The Fourth Amendment regulates all
government intrusions into reasonable expectations
of privacy.

The defendant, a murder suspect, admitted to a
theft. Other officers went to the defendant’s house to corroborate his admission to the theft. The defendant was not home but his wife agreed to speak to the officers. The officers asked about any guns that might be in the house. The defendant’s wife showed them four weapons that she offered to let them take. The officers
took the weapons and several articles of clothing acquired in the same manner. One gun was later determined to be the murder weapon.

Did the officers obtained the murder weapon
and the clothing through an illegal search?

No. The officers obtained this evidence through
private actions.