Search and seizure is used in criminal law to describe the examination of a person`s home, vehicle or business by a law enforcement officer for evidence that a crime has been committed. During a search, law enforcement officers examine some or all of a person`s property and look for specific objects related to a crime they have reason to believe has been committed. Seizure occurs when officers take possession of items during the search. While the precise interpretation may vary, this right can often require law enforcement agencies to obtain a search warrant or the consent of the owner before proceeding with any form of search and seizure. In cases where evidence is seized during a search, such evidence may be refused in the context of legal proceedings, such as a request to remove evidence under the exclusionary rule. „The house is untouchable. Inspections, searches or seizures of homes are not permitted, except in cases and types consistent with measures for the protection of personal liberty. Controls and inspections carried out for reasons of public health and safety or for economic and fiscal reasons shall be governed by the appropriate legislation. The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens from improper search and seizure of property. In order to legally search a person`s body or property, the police must have a probable reason.
For example, legal research relates to the legal definition of probable reason. In corporate and administrative law, the Supreme Court`s interpretation has evolved in favour of a stronger government in terms of investigative powers. [19] [20] In Federal Trade Commission v. American Tobacco Co.[21], the Supreme Court held that although the FTC was granted broad subpoena power, it did not have the right to undertake a general „fishing expedition” in private newspapers to search for those that are relevant and irrelevant in the hope that something would emerge. Justice Holmes ruled that this would violate the „spirit and letter” of the Fourth Amendment. Warrantless searches or arrests must also meet the probable cause standard to be admissible in court. While such measures may prolong an investigation, they are necessary to protect the privacy and constitutional rights of potential suspects. Some countries have certain provisions in their constitutions that give the public the right to be free from „improper search and seizure.” This right is generally based on the premise that everyone has the right to an adequate right to privacy.
Courts use several areas of analysis to determine whether a search violated constitutional protections. Only searches that satisfies with certainty all the minimum requirements of the following four doctrines are unlikely to be challenged in court. [13] These qualifying doctrines are adequacy[14], probable cause[15], judicial authority[16] and specificity. [17] While police judgments rendered shortly before or during a search or arrest usually provide the factors that determine relevance, questions of probable cause, judicial authority and details are usually satisfied by police proceedings overseen by a judge or judge prior to a search or arrest. Probable cause requires a sufficient degree of reasonable suspicion. The requirements of specificity are set out in the constitutional text itself. Compliance with these requirements by law enforcement authorities shall be verified before an arrest warrant is issued or refused by a sitting judicial authority. [16] If a person does not have a „reasonable expectation of privacy” that society is prepared to recognize in a particular property, any government interference with that property is not considered a search for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment, and a warrant is never required. For example, the courts have found that an individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to information disclosed to third parties, such as writing outside an envelope mailed or left for collection in a place where others could see it. While this does not mean that the individual does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of this envelope, the Court held that an individual does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy that society is prepared to recognize in the contents of garbage left outside the envelope of a house. [9] Evidence obtained directly as a result of a search, seizure or arrest without probable cause cannot be used in a court of law against a defendant charged with committing a crime.
If a search or arrest has been carried out with or without a warrant and a probable reason has not been sufficiently proven, evidence obtained without probable cause may be suppressed in court. RESEARCH, crim. Examination of a man`s home, premises or person to find evidence of guilt in relation to a crime or offence of which he is accused. 2. The Constitution of the United States. States, amendments, art. 4, protects individuals from improper search and seizure. 3 History, Const. Article 1895; Rawle, Const. Cap. 10, p.
127; 10 John. R. 263; 11 John. R. 500; 3 Cranch, p. 447. 3. By the Law of 2 March 1799, p. 68, 1 Story`s L. U. S. For an arrest, search or seizure of property to be lawful, an officer must prove probable cause to a judge or judge.
There are four general categories of evidence that a public servant can rely on to establish probable cause. Some limited searches are also permitted during an interruption of investigation or an incident leading to an arrest. This research can be described as refined research. [12] SEARCH, RIGHT OF, mar. Law. Right of a belligerent to examine and inspect the papers of a neutral ship at sea. On the European continent, this is called visitation rights. Dalloz, Dict. mots Prises Maritimes, n° 104-111.
2. This right does not extend to the examination of the summons; It also does not extend to a warship, but is strictly limited to the search for merchant ships. The exercise of this right is to prevent the smuggling trade. Although often rejected by powerful neutral nations, this right now seems inviolable. The punishment for violent resistance to this right is the confiscation of property, which is therefore held before the visit. Except in extreme cases of flagrant abuse of his rights by a belligerent, the neutral has no right to oppose a search. 1 Kent, com. 154; 2 bro. Civ..