| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "SEARCH SEIZURE LAW": |
|
|
Search and Seizure Law, 2006.
This article looks at the history of the Search and Seizure Law, known currently in the United States as law under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
3,375 words (approx. 13.5 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the history and interpretation of the Search and Seizure Law. The writer discusses how such a law emerged and explains that those wishing to protect their property and privacy against unreasonable search and seizure have often battled governments, courts, employers, secular groups, and even one another in a struggle between the rights of the individual and the rights of the general public and legal systems. Yet while individuals struggle to retain their right to privacy and rights against unreasonable search and seizure, the United States Court system has consistently narrowed these rights. The writer maintains that it is this history of conflict that has led to the current interpretations of the search and seizure law, and has made these issues some of the most important in the United States culture today.
From the Paper
"According to Roman culture, the house was under special protection of the household gods. Anyone who reached the fireplace of a house was offered the protection of the gods. Even Cicero discussed the concept of the home as a protected asylum, when he stated that the house of a citizen was to be defended since in was "a place of refuge so sacred to all men that to be dragged from thence is unlawful" (Lasson, 15).
However, it is in these Roman times that one can begin to see the shift to allow for certain types of search and seizure within a court of law. While individual persons were responsible for their own prosecution against others, they were still given a warrant, which allowed them full rights to gather evidence. This "evidence" included all papers and documents relating to the case, and was obtained through a search of the home of the accused, or through a search of any other home (Lasson, 16). As one can see, the ambiguousness of the warrant for search and seizure allowed the prosecution to search anyone, and seize any documents they felt "necessary"."
| |
|
Search and Seizure Laws, 2006.
A review of the laws pertaining to the searching of private property and the seizure of criminal evidence.
1,036 words (approx. 4.1 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a detailed examination of a particular crime scenario and relates how search and seizure laws and rules apply to it. The paper explores the scenario and how the defendant's attorney could effectively argue against some of the evidence that was obtained in the search of the home where the body was found.
Outline:
Abstract
Introduction
History
Search
Constitution
The Case
From the Paper
"The constitution addresses the topic of search and seizure and the boundaries that must be followed.
In another CA case a man was refused entry to his home until police officers could obtain a search warrant that uncovered some marijuana.
The police were initially called because his ex-wife was moving out and asked for a civil standby while she removed her things. As she was leaving she told officers that she saw her husband hide marijuana under a couch. Police refused to allow him entry to the home for 15 minutes while they obtained a search warrant because they believed if he got into the house he would flush the evidence. The courts held the actions were illegal. The law allows search and seizure without a search warrant in cases of extreme and immediate danger to someone's life. This was not the case in the marijuana search. "
| |
|
Search and Seizure Law, 2006.
An overview and interpretation of the law of search and seizure in the U.S.
3,375 words (approx. 13.5 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how search and seizure law, known currently in the United States as law under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, has been in existence in one form or another since biblical times. It looks at how those wishing to protect their property and privacy against unreasonable search and seizure have often battled governments, courts, employers, secular groups and even one another in a struggle between the rights of the individual and the rights of the general public and legal systems. It discusses how the United States Court system has consistently narrowed these rights and how it is this history of conflict that has led to the current interpretations of the search and seizure law.
From the Paper
"According to Roman culture, the house was under special protection of the household gods. Anyone who reached the fireplace of a house was offered the protection of the gods. Even Cicero discussed the concept of the home as a protected asylum, when he stated that the house of a citizen was to be defended since in was "a place of refuge so sacred to all men that to be dragged from thence is unlawful" (Lasson, 15).
However, it is in these Roman times that one can begin to see the shift to allow for certain types of search and seizure within a court of law. While individual persons were responsible for their own prosecution against others, they were still given a warrant, which allowed them full rights to gather evidence. This "evidence" included all papers and documents relating to the case, and was obtained through a search of the home of the accused, or through a search of any other home (Lasson, 16). As one can see, the ambiguousness of the warrant for search and seizure allowed the prosecution to search anyone, and seize any documents they felt "necessary"."
| |
|
The Search and Seizure Law, 2007.
This paper discusses the Fourth Amendment and the controversy surrounding vehicle searches and consent to search issues.
2,777 words (approx. 11.1 pages), 14 sources, MLA, $ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses federal and state case law involving the Fourth Amendment. The paper shows how the right to protection from unreasonable search and seizure is not a simple issue, particularly when dealing with the search of vehicles. The paper highlights how there are no consistent laws regarding search and seizure of vehicles; there are differing opinions of various courts on these issues. The paper concludes that motorists will continue to be confused and the rights of American citizens will continue to be in jeopardy.
From the Paper
"When originally drafted, the Fourth Amendment sought to protect the colonists from unreasonable search and seizure in smuggling cases. Prior to the Amendment, the English authorities used writs of assistance, or general warrants that authorized officials to search anything and seize any goods. These writs remained in effect for the lifetime of the king. In 1760, when King George II passed away, these writs were challenged by James Otis on the grounds these writs went against the English constitution (FindLaw, "History."). As a result, when the Amendments to the United States constitution were drafts, a protection of unreasonable search and seizure was included in the rights of the people."
| |
|
The Fourth Amendment and Search and Seizure, 2002.
Examines the 'search and seizure law' in relation to the Fourth Constitutional Amendment.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 6 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a brief examination of the Constitutional interpretation of the search and seizure law. There is a focus mainly on the limitations of the search and seizure law, as this provides focus to this extremely varied legal topic.
| |
|
Search and Seizure Laws, 2002.
This paper discusses search and seizure laws based on the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
2,080 words (approx. 8.3 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that the Constitution of the United States provides protection from illegal search and seizure through the Fourth Amendment, but the Fourth Amendment is written in such a way that it can be vague when it comes to what is and what is not a legal search and seizure. The author points out that searches and seizures must have reasonable reasons for being requested and for being authorized and conducted; when a search is allowed, it must be backed by affirmations or oaths that explain why the search is being requested. The paper concludes that any time one studies issues of the Fourth Amendment rights to be protected from search and seizure that is unreasonable, it is important to understand that the case may look very similar to others, but may be completely different when the facts are examined.
From the Paper
"The judges who ruled in each case commented that if the jacket had been locked in a briefcase within the van it might have called to question the driver?s ability to consent to a search. This was an interesting ruling especially since previous cases regarding similar issues have been decided I favor of the government as well as against the government and its claim to the right to search possessions within a stopped vehicle."
| |
|
Car Seizure Laws in New York State, 2002.
Discusses the implementation of policies allowing for the seizure of private cars belonging to drunk drivers in three New York State counties.
4,605 words (approx. 18.4 pages), 21 sources, APA, $ 119.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
There are at least three counties in the State of New York that have enacted laws or implemented polices allowing for the seizure and forfeiture of privately-owned automobiles upon arrest for a Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) offense. In some counties vehicle seizures are made upon a defendant's first arrest for DWI. In every county, seizure of a defendant's vehicle precedes an adjudication of guilt. After the paper compares the laws between the three New York counties, it examines important Constitutional issues which have arisen from these policies.
From the Paper
"Like New York County (City), Nassau County also utilizes a currently existing Code section concerning the disposition of property held by the property clerk as authority for and enforcement of the DWI vehicle forfeiture. Among all three counties examined here -- New York, Nassau and Suffolk (Suffolk County has adopted separate, offense-specific legislation) -- the rationale for application of vehicle forfeiture to DWI is that, since a vehicle is a necessary element of a "Driving While Intoxicated" charge, it is thus an "instrumentality of a crime," and is therefore governed by local law dealing with property disposition held by the property clerk of the local police department."
| |
|
Search and Seizure, 2001.
This paper examines "The Automobile Exception" which permits a search and seizure policy.
1,245 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the history and constitutional development of the "Automobile Exception" to the search warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment which originated in 1924. The automobile exception allows police officers to search and seize a vehicle without a search warrant. It cites several relevant cases such as New York vs.Belton, California vs. Camey and their legal precedents.
From the Paper
"A woman and a man are sitting on a park bench chatting. A police officer approaches and notices a syringe in the man's shirt pocket. The officer asks the man why he has a syringe, and the man replies that he uses it to take drugs. The officer seizes a handbag that is close to the woman; he proceeds to search the handbag and removes the contents including her wallet and identification. Under the current law, this search would violate the Fourth Amendment since the officer did not first obtain a search warrant. However, in Wyoming v. Houghton', the United States Supreme Court held that a similar search was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The only difference was that the man and woman were in an automobile, and the search fell under an exception to the Fourth Amendment, commonly called the automobile exception", which was created in 1924 in the case Carroll vs. The United States. The automobile exception is an exception to the Fourth Amendment which eliminates the need for a search warrant when there is probable cause to believe that an automobile contains contraband or instruments/evidence of criminal activity. This paper will examine the history of the automobile exception and important cases that have involved and shaped this constitutional exception."
| |
|
Search And Seizure, 2002.
A comparison of two articles which discuss probably cause for search and seizure by police in the U.S.
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A comparison of two articles on search and seize procedures compatibility with the 4th Amendment.
| |
|
Search and Seizure, 1994.
This paper discusses "search and seizure": Supreme Court case studies, theory, historical precedents related to 4th Amendment, warrants, exclusionary rule, plain-view doctrine and police training.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 4 sources, $ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Each year the U.S. Supreme Court returns to certain issues that it has decided in the past to reshape, redirect, or clarify with new cases that ask new questions. Search and seizure law is one such area of criminal law, and the courts have addressed this issue many times in an attempt to refine the requirements faced by police in conducting searches, in the admissibility of evidence seized during a search, in the need for a warrant for a search, and so on. In the 1992-1993 Supreme Court session, the Justices returned to this issue with a case from Minnesota, Minnesota v. Dickerson (113 S. Ct. 2130 [1993]). The Court had previously provided some exceptions to the requirement for a warrant for a search under "stop and frisk" provisions allowing a police officer to stop and question a person reasonably suspected ... "
| |
|
Police Searches and Seizures, 2001.
This essay is an overview of police searches and seizures and the problematic aspects of them.
990 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 15 sources, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a very brief overview of police searches and seizures in the form of a literature review of some of the most important issues that have been addressed in this area. It examines the arena of search and seizure from a legal point of view, because it is part of the law enforcement agency. It details the latitude that police and other law enforcement agents are allowed to carry out searches and seizures, and if they are rightfully carries out. It details jurisdiction of prevailing local political and judicial thinking and the considerable variance in the amount of protection given to the individual rights of the accused person because of local custom in different regions of the United States.
From the Paper
"The subject of police searches and seizures is both complex and wide-ranging and has been for a number of years one of the most important concerns in American policing and judicial circles. This paper provides a very brief overview of the topic in the form of a literature review of some of the most important issues that have been addressed in this area.The arena of search and seizure covers all those practices engaged in by law enforcement officers to gain sufficient evidence to ensure the arrest and conviction of an offender (Polyvios, 1982, p. 18). The latitude allowed police and other law enforcement agents to carry out searches and seizures varies considerably from jurisdiction to jurisdiction due to prevailing local political and judicial thinking and there is considerable variance in the amount of protection given to the individual rights of the accused person because of local custom (Rossow &Stefkovich, 1996, p. 38)." It gives examples of several cases where police searches were wrongfully carried out and details their rulings."
| |
|
Student Search and Seizure Case, 2007.
A case study of a hypothetical situation in which a student was searched and arrested at school for possession of cocaine and a comparison with real life cases of the same nature.
1,074 words (approx. 4.3 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This three page paper analyzes the constitutionality of searches and seizures in schools. The writer explores a hypothetical case in which a student was searched and arrested when a cocaine pipe was found in her coat pocket. It then applies real life cases to the argument that the search of the hypothetical student at school, was illegal.
From the Paper
"In the TLO case the court ruled that the authorities had no reasonable suspicion that there were cigarettes in the student's purse. In our case, the officer had no reasonable suspicion that the student's coat pocket would contain drugs therefore he had no right to perform the search of her person."
"The weakest argument we have is the argument that the school did not have the right to search because it has no claim as the parent substitute. Several courts have upheld school searches with the ruling that the school operates as the parent during school hours, therefore the student has no right to privacy from school authorities.
However in the case of New Jersey v. T.L.O. the courts found that schools do not in fact act as parents."
| |
|
Search and Seizure, 2001.
This paper is a detailed look at testing citizen rights by the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution by trial and error over the years
3,180 words (approx. 12.7 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 92.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper focuses on six Supreme Court cases in the history of search and seizure, and explores how the concepts evolved through these cases in trial and error fashion. The author discusses such landmark cases as Terry v. Ohio, Adams v. Williams, and INS v. Delgado. The paper looks at what now constitutes reasonable searches, totality of the circumstances, and probable cause.
From the Paper
"Search and seizure is protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. A series of cases, beginning in the 1960s and continuing to the present, have dealt with the United States Supreme Court?s interpretation of the Fourth Amendment involving citizens? rights in search and seizure cases."
| |
|
Search and Seizure and the Rehnquist Court, 2003.
An analysis of the history and current states of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Bill of Rights and their interpretations and applications by the United States Supreme Court.
2,684 words (approx. 10.7 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is a historical and substantive analysis of the interpretation and application of search and seizure law by the Supreme Court with a significant emphasis placed on the analysis of political and social pressures and responsibilities of the Court and how they thus respond. The landmark cases of Terry vs. Ohio, Mapp vs. Ohio, Bostick vs. Florida, and Weeks vs. United States, are utilized to demonstrate the effect external pressures on the Court. Additionally, much emphasis is given to the development of arguments in opposition to alarmist and reactionary crime control models, including the development of the Department of Homeland Security.
From the Paper
"The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States provides a vehicle whereby each American citizen may be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The relatively straightforward articulation of the Fourth Amendment, as well as the implied meanings its words may hold, continues to be a volatile, emotional topic of significant political and judicial debate. Insomuch as the balance between personal civil liberty and state security treads a fine line between fairness and injustice, as so does the tolerance of a free people to be restrained in the exercise of their freedom. Those citizens well served by the relentless security initiatives of American legislators and bureaucratic agencies hold utmost regard for its criminal justice authority. However, many other citizens foster both a growing contempt and suspicion of the intentions of an ever-infringing American government."
| |
|
Seizure Arrest, 2005.
Discusses why individuals with epilepsy are sometimes wrongfully arrested due to their having a seizure in public.
1,916 words (approx. 7.7 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Wrongful arrest due to seizure activity in public is not an uncommon complication for individuals with epilepsy and other seizure disorders, not caused by illicit behaviors. There are over two millions Americans living with epilepsy, all of whom at some time have experienced challenges associated with their disease and many of whom have been the victims of wrongful arrest and incarceration. This work addresses the problem of wrongful arrests for seizure-related behavior in public, the degree of the problem and some possible solutions to the problem.
From the Paper
"Though efforts have been made to educate and assist individuals and to train professionals who are called to the scene, individuals with seizure disorders are often innately aware that there is something wrong, and they are therefore resistant to assistance, and especially restraint which can be perceived as resisting arrest. This problem has been documented for centuries and would have been significantly worse in the past as less seizure suppression medication was available to patients and the social stigma of the problem was even greater, for both the individual and the family."
|
|
|
