Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
The Constitution of the United States of America is the most powerful document in the country, and its Fourth Amendment implies the necessity to secure personal space and items while disabling a search without a warrant and logical reasoning for its necessity (Mannheimer, 2015). Despite a high priority of this law, an extended variety of cases tends to exist due to the misunderstandings of the exceptions and details of the amendment. Consequently, the primary goal of this essay is to determine the understanding of the correlation between the Fourth Amendment and police entry, define potential requirements for a warrant, and describe the consequences leading to the exception for the warrant’s issue. Mary Ellis’ case is used to support the findings, and, in the end, the conclusions are drawn to summarize the primary outcomes of the essay.
The Fourth Amendment and Police Entry
Firstly, the correlation between the Fourth Amendment and the actions of the police on private property have to be determined to have a general perception of the allowed actions of the police. In this case, the Fourth Amendment states that the searches have to be connected to the judicial processes while having approval from the authority (judge), and other unreasonable searches are prohibited (437 U.S. 385, 1978). Based on the information provided above, it remains apparent that the Fourth Amendment controls the ability of the police officers to enter the private house and eliminates the violation of privacy simultaneously (Jackson, 2014). It could be said that the defilements of the law by the police are present in the world while portraying the disrespectful behavior of the officers (Jackson, 2014; Smith, 2002).
Despite the essentiality of the warrant for the search, the requirements tend to exist to assure compliance with the rationale of the law. In this instance, the police have to ensure the judge of the existence of the potential cause of the crime while providing reasoning for the necessity to search location to find additional evidence (437 U.S. 385, 1978). Nonetheless, regardless of having positive intentions and compliance with the legal system, obtaining the warrant requires time, and the essential evidence tends to be destroyed due to the inability to act legally without acceptance from the judge (437 U.S. 385, 1978). Consequently, the violations have a tendency to exist due to the necessity to review the following jurisdiction and the need to prioritize the vitality of the warrants (Bar-Gill & Friedman, 2012). One of the cases of violation is the actions of the police officer, Headricks, as he did not have a warrant for the search while entering the apartment without permission, and it led to his murder (437 U.S. 385, 1978).
This approach creates difficulties while resolving the crimes and the number of exceptions should be extended. In turn, the situation presented above-created confusion, as the actions of the police officers did not comply with any exclusions related to the entrance without the warrant. Currently, the special circumstances, which allow the police to enter the house without permission, are connected to the existence of the emergency (prohibiting the offense), the discovery of the additional victims of the murder, and acting when a person requires immediate medical assistance (437 U.S. 385, 1978). Nonetheless, the description of these aspects is unclear and general, and this matter can be regarded as a primary reason for the development of confusion related to the actions of Headricks. Alternatively, a combination of the factors mentioned above contributes to the understanding that the changes related to the warrant acceptability and circumstances, which allow the actions without the warrant, have to be introduced to ensure the reasonable actions of the police while maintaining the order in the society and complying with the core amendments in the Constitution.
Mary Ellis’ Case
To understand the application of the facts mentioned above, Mary Ellis’ case is used, as the woman faces a disturbing image while finding her neighbor with the stabbed knife in his back in her house. Mary Ellis calls 911 to report the situation. In this case, the primary question is the ability to assess the legality of the police entry t0 the woman’s house. In this case, it could be said that the police entry to Ellis’ house could be viewed as legal, as the owner of the house called 911 and allowed personal entry to the home. Meanwhile, the situation could be regarded as an emergency simultaneously, as the potential suspect is not determined while causing the threat to the owners of the house and the rest of the community. Additionally, it has to be mentioned that the house is the exact crime scene due to the presence of the dead body in one of the rooms. Consequently, the evidence is located around the house while making all of the rooms the center of the investigation. Based on the information provided above, it remains apparent the depicted case does not violate the principles of the Fourth Amendment while following the rationale to assure the exceptional case of the entry.
Another important aspect is the ability of the police to obtain the evidence without having a warrant while evaluating a potential extent of actions in the context of the presented case. It could be said that the police had to search for the evidence, as it would contribute to the determination of the actual killer. Nonetheless, the lawyer can use these actions against the police officers due to the significant importance of the warrant in the modern legal system, as some elements of the evidence could have been diminished by accident or on purpose (Bar-Gill & Friedman, 2012). It could be said that the police should terminate all actions at the crime scene and acquire a warrant to ensure the legality of their actions while avoiding adverse consequences in the future.
Conclusion
In the end, the essay assisted in revealing that the Fourth Amendment plays a critical role in defining the acceptable actions of the police related to the permission for searching, and the warrant is required to conduct the legally accepted examination of the location. Meanwhile, various circumstances such as emergencies tend to exist to ensure the ability of the police to enter the public property in critical cases to eliminate the offense. All of the matters described above were highly revealed in Mary Ellis’ case, as the police were not required to have a warrant due to the emergency reported by the owner of the house and the increasing threat due to the absence of the potential suspect in the location. Nonetheless, despite the initial positive intentions to obtain all the required evidence from the crime scene, the police officers had to ensure the legality of their actions. In this case, the lawyer can use the absence of a warrant in his favor while portraying the potential invalidity of the evidence.
References
Bar-Gill, O., & Friedman, B. (2012). Taking warrants seriously. Northwestern University Law Review, 106(4), 1609.
437 U.S. 385: Mincey v. Arizona. (1978). Web.
Jackson, J. (2014). The Fourth Amendment and search warrant presentment: Is a man’s house always his castle? American Journal of Trial Advocacy, 35(3), 525.
Mannheimer, M. (2015). The contingent Fourth Amendment. Emory Law Journal, 64(5), 1229.
Smith, J. (2002). Press one for warrant: Reinventing the Fourth Amendment’s search warrant requirement through electronic procedures. Vanderbilt, 55(5), 1591.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.