On appeal, Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the motion to suppress. Soon after, Hudson was convicted of drug possession. Hudson then filed an appeal which brought the case to the Supreme Court. Provision of the constitution involved in this case: This case involves the exclusionary rule which comes directly from the Fifth Amendment. It states that no object may be used in court as evidence if obtained illegally or without a proper search warrant.
Search and Seizure Paper According to the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, “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 be 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” as a country we take our liberties seriously. Our founding fathers believed a search, seizure, arrest, and reasonableness were the basic foundation to a law abiding country. Today, these elements continue to impact our criminal justice system. We will take a closer look into these to define there necessity in our
“For example, it makes little sense to require an officer to obtain a search warrant to seize contraband that is in plain view. Under the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement, the appropriateness of every warrantless search is decided on a case-by-case basis, weighing the defendant's privacy interests against the reasonable needs of law enforcement under the circumstances” (G K. Hill, 2005). Another exception to warrant requirements as it pertains to the above article is that the video released shows there was a lack of physical harm as seen on George Zimmerman. This was important to the prosecution because Zimmerman claimed Trayvon Martin attacked him and his death was a result of self defense. In conclusion, authority’s base warrants on probable cause which are only necessary in a small percentage of cases.
During another search, police found even more evidence. Procedural History: The case was Issues: Issue 1: Whether the exclusionary rule applies in this case. The rule forbids using illegally obtained evidence in court unless it was an emergency circumstance. However, the police stated there were exigent circumstances that surpassed the need for a warrant. At the same time under the police-created exigency doctrine, exigent circumstances do not justify a warrantless search if the circumstances were created by the police [ii].
The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution involving the clause of double jeopardy states that no person shall “be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb…” This statement gives no right to the government to prosecute or punish a criminal for the same offense. Going through trial in a case is not only financially straining for both the court and the individual but also emotionally. There are three conditions necessary for a defendant to have protection under double jeopardy against a second prosecution. The earlier prosecution must progress to the point of jeopardy attachment. Second, a prosecution must then involve the same offense.
Criminal Procedure Policy Paper CJA/364 May 1, Due process is the legal requirement that the law must respect the legal rights of every human being. The due process model demands a careful and informed consideration of the facts of each individual case. According to this model, law enforcement agents must recognize the rights of suspects during arrest, questioning, and handling. In addition, constitutional guarantees must be considered by judges and prosecutors during trials. The primary mission of the due process model is to protect innocent people from wrongful conviction.
Robert Thovsen Assignment 6 August 11, 2012 Responding To Domestic Violence Incidents * What is the difference between "pro-arrest" and "mandatory arrest" domestic violence policies? What is the policy in the state you live in? Research on Internet the development and implementation of the rest policy using your state. When the policies change, and if so, and why? 1) Pro-Arrest: Laws give authority for arrest without a warrant as the preferred, but not required, action in cases involving domestic partners.
Due Process 1 Due Process Due Process 2 Due Process Introduction In my paper I will be talking about many things and those things that I will be talking about are the concepts of due process, about the adversarial system, and the process of post-arrest after a crime has been committed. Everything I talk about in my paper is very important in that it helps with the due process the adversarial system and the post-arrest procedures. You read all about these
United States, Petitioner v. Alberto Antonio LEON et al. Respondent No 82-1771. Argued Jan. 17, 1984 Decided July 5, 1984 Rehearing Denied Sept. 18, 1984. 468 U.S. 897 (1984) The case presents the question whether the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule should be modified so as not to defame from use in the prosecution’s case in chief of evidence obtained by officer’s action acting in reasonable reliance on a search warrant signed and issued by a detached and neutral magistrate, which was found not supporting by probable cause. The question presented at hand is misfeasance, officers acting lawfully , the defendant on the other hand, stated officers acted improper by their performance invading on defendants privacy and, on the Fourth Amendment, officers removing indispensable evidence
The Supreme Court created the exclusionary rule to prevent police misconduct. When a police officer is in violation of an individual’s fourth amendment right which is the right to be free from illegal search and seizure, the evidence found during that illegal act is kept out of federal court. This would have been helpful during the OJ Simpson trial. The exclusionary rule not only has three elements to it but it has a purpose for it too. With this are the three elements which are as follows.