In the Constitution of the United States of America, the Founding Fathers specified, in the first hug drug amendments, known as The Bill of Rights, specifically in the one-fourth Amendment,?The right of the commonwealth to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against ludicrous searches and captures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, back up by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.? (JusticeLearning)Many people take this for granted, thinking that the importation of this text is but that police officers barging into their house and rummaging through their ain belongings will be illegal; however, most people would be surprised to learn the far-reaching implications of this amendment, and how it doesn?t apply simply to police officers, but to many other people in their lives. The main sections of the Fourth Amendment that come under the courts? review ar the phrases of person, houses, papers, and effects, unreasonable searches and seizures, and probable cause. Each of the following Supreme judicial system cases deals with one (or more) of these wordings which are subject to interpretation.
A search and seizure court case in Arizona has been working its vogue up the judicial ladder for more than six years.
In 2003 a 13-year-old junior-high girl, Savana Redding, was accused of having not turned in a bottle of prescription-strength Ibuprofen to the school nurse, and instead allowing it to remain in her possession throughout the day. When school officials learned of this from one of her classmates, they called her to the battlefront office of the school and proceeded to search her belongings, finding nothing to begin with sending her to a private room where a feminine secretary and the school nurse asked her to remove her...
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment