Private Individuals Searches & Seizures

Private Individuals Searches & Seizures

The fourth amendment makes every proof seized by the law enforcement inadmissible in the court of law in the operation of obtaining them; the authorities violated the due process and the constitutionally assured privileges of the accused. This is known as the exclusionary rule, a prophylactic judicial ruling enforce on the law enforcement officials in order to safeguard the legal rights assured by the fourth amendment. Even though it's applicable to the police officers nevertheless this does not cover private individuals. All the private individuals, as long as he or she gets proof, they may come ahead in the trial of a accused and whenever he or she hands over will become admissible as the acts are not lined by the fourth amendment. The private person should come forward to their own choice without any recommendation or orchestration of the police officers, or the proof will again become inadmissible since it will be covered by the fourth amendment. Whoever hands in the proof, can get it by the illegal or legal way and it will be admissible as long as it truly is strongly related to the case. The individual needs to remember that in the procedure of giving over the proof the will be responsible to the regulation for the procedure for acquisition such as breaking and entering, theft, or robbery if the acquisition is unlawful means.

Search & Seizure of Evidence from Non-Residents in a Foreign Country

The US vs. Verdugo-Urduquiez case was founded by the ruling process that search and seizures in alliance with the Foreign Law Enforcement in their own property enables admissibility of said proof in the US Courts and the fourth amendment does not follow the search and seizure for the safety of the accused since the Constitution does not have the capability over the mentioned Foreign Land and does not require the security of the exclusionary rule. Even the mentioned facts are carried over to the US and the case will be tried in American Courts using the proper extradition processes in adopting the laws of the Foreign Country in the investigation and seizure occurred, acquisition will proof the US law enforcement and the justice system was not performed in any constitutional guarantee of the legal rights by reason of geography, which the exclusionary rule does not apply.

'Dog Sniff Searches': Warrantless Detection & Seizure

The action of the sniffing can't be considered as a search as long as the police officers are lawfully located in the areas which the sniffer dog finds illegal drugs. The dogs are educated to identify and track fragrance, not really to look for and there is no requirement for a probable cause or warrant. In open areas it applies when it comes to lawfully finding admissible evidence whenever the proof