In-Depth Notes on the Fourth Amendment and Search & Seizure

Fourth Amendment Overview

Introduction to the Fourth Amendment

  • • 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.

  • The Fourth Amendment protects a person’s reasonable expectations of privacy.

    • The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures of persons or property.

Key Concepts of the Fourth Amendment

  • Protected Entities:

    • Persons, houses, papers, and effects.

      What are Effects?

    • Effects: This refers to personal belongings and items.

  • • Against what:

    unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.

    • Who’s the government here? Usually police officers.

Consent and the Fourth Amendment

Consent- requirements

Voluntary

Not the result of duress or coercion

Saying yes freely

More than mere acquiescence

Burden of proof on State

Third-Party Consent in Searches

  • 3rd Party Consent

    Warrantless entry is valid when based on consent of third party who is the government official, at time of entry, reasonably believe possesses common authority over the premises but in fact does not.

    Based on reasonably objective belief.

    Each case judged on its own facts.

• Not from Landlord (even with a right of entry clause in the lease)

• Not from a non-resident owner

• Not from a Hotel clerk

Plain View Doctrine

Lawful Entry and Immediacy

  • Lawful Initial Entry: Entry onto property was lawful, or condition is visible from a public area.

  • Immediately Apparent: At time of viewing, there is probable cause to associate the property in plain view with illegal activity without further investigation.

Reasonable Expectation of Privacy

Mutual use and control by tenants, And owner, Multi-family dwelling, Visitors, Delivery people, Trades people

Common hallway - no expectation of privacy

  • Specifics include:

    • Hallways of Apartment Buildings: No privacy expectation due to mutual use.

    • Common Porches: Even tenants lack privacy rights here.

    • Visitors and Non-tenants: They cannot claim a reasonable expectation of privacy.

    • Common porch area – no privacy

      Even tenants wouldn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy

      Non-tenant can’t claim reasonable expectation of privacy

Warrants and Probable Cause

True to the Amendment’s text, the government’s search or seizure must be

reasonable.

The warrant requirement itself ensures that searches and seizures are generally

cleared in advance by a judge. To get a warrant from a judge, the government must show “probable cause.”

“Probable cause” simply means a certain level of suspicion of criminal activity—to justify a particular search or a particular seizure. Its suspicion that attaches to a particular person, place, or item—for instance.


  • The Fourth Amendment does not protect against searches of:

    • Open fields.

    • Abandoned property.

    • Searches conducted by private individuals without government involvement.

Government Searches and Digital Tracking

Tracking Without a Warrant

Can the government track you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for an entire month, using your cell phone data and location information? (Carpenter v. United States, 2018)

  • In Carpenter v. United States (2018), the court explored whether the government can use cell phone data to track individuals continuously.

Exigent Circumstances

Emergency Exigent Searches

  • Emergency doctrine – danger to life.

  • Preventing Bodily Harm

  • Preventing escape of a Suspect

  • Hearing a Scream from a Vehicle’s

  • Trunk

  • Heavy smell from a student’s locker

  • Searching pockets of someone expected of carrying heavy explosives

  • Escape

  • Destruction of evidence

Exclusionary Rule

Exclusionary Rule, Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)

• Evidence obtained through a violation of the Fourth Amendment is generally not admissible by the prosecution during the defendant’s criminal trial.

• Rationale is that if police know evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used to convict someone of a crime, they will not violate it.

Drug Testing for Athletes

Chris’s Drug Test would be allowed under current law.

In 1995, the United States Supreme Court ruled that public school athletes can be required to undergo drug testing even if they are not suspected of using drugs.

Justice Scalia gave several reasons for testing student athletes before anyone else in the student body:

• 1) student athletes have lesser privacy expectations because they are accustomed to dressing and showering in locker rooms

• 2) they have to get physicals, keep a minimum GPA, and comply with the RULES of the Team

• 3) Student athletes are role models to other students;

• 4) Drugs may be particularly dangerous for student athletes.

Case Studies on Search Reasonableness

Did the authorities have any “Reasonable Grounds to search Betty’s purse?

  • •A high school student was caught smoking in the bathroom and the Assistant Vice Principal searched the student’s purse for cigarettes. When the search turned up rolling papers, marijuana and a list of “people who owe me money,”the student claimed that the search of her purse was unconstitutional under theFourth Amendment.

    •In 1985, the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 margin, ruled that New Jersey and the school had met a "reasonableness" standard for conducting such searches at school. The high court said school administrators don't need to have a search warrant or probable cause before conducting a search because students have a reduced expectation of privacy when in school.

If so, was the search reasonable in scope under the circumstances

  • •Safford Unified School Dist. No. 1 v. Redding (2009)

    • A middle school student, Savana Redding, was suspected of distributing over-the-counter and prescription pain relievers to other students based on a tip by another student. School officials conducted a strip search of Savana and did not find any pills. Savana’s mother sued the school district for violating her daughter’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches.