In the law enforcement context, search by warrant is still the general rule, however there have been some loosening of the requirement.  The scope of a valid search incident to arrest once limited to areas within the immediate reach of the arrested suspect, was expanded to a “protective sweep” since arresting officers have a reasonable belief that someone is in the home that is showing danger to others. The Court has also held that an exigent circumstances exception applied even where the exigency arose as a result of police conduct, so long as the police conduct was reasonable in that it neither threatened to nor violated theFourth Amendment.

For the 4th Amendment to apply to particular sets of fact, there must be a “search” and a “seizure”, occurring typically in a criminal case, with an attempt to use judicially what was seized.

The 4th Amendment of the US Constitution protects personal privacy, and every citizen’s rights to be free from unreasonable government intrusion into their homes, businesses and property.

In the criminal law realm, 4th Amendment “search and seizure” protections extend to:

A law enforcement officer’s physical apprehension or “seizure” of a person, by way of a stop or arrest; and

Police searches of places and items in which an individual has a legitimate expectation of privacy — his or her person, clothing, purse, luggage, vehicle, house, apartment, hotel room, and place of business, to name a few examples.

The 4th Amendment provides safeguards to individuals during searches and detentions, and prevents unlawfully seized items from being used as evidence in cases.

This is applied when:

Anindividual is stoppedfor police questioning while walking down the street.

An individual is pulled over for a minortraffic infraction, and the police officer searches the vehicle’s trunk.

An individual is arrested.

Police officers enter an individual’s house to place him or her under arrest.

A police officer may not search or seize an individual or his or her property unless the officer has:

Avalid search warrant;

Avalid arrestwarrant; or

A belief rising to the level of “probable cause” that an individual has committed a crime.

Cornell Law School. (n.d.). SEARCH AND SEIZURE. Retrieved January 30, 2020

Find Law Team. (2019, January 22). 4th Amendment Search and Seizure Protections. Retrieved

January 30, 2020

reply with 250 words

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution places limits on the power of the police to make arrests, search people and their property, and seize objects and contraband (such as illegal drugs or weapons). The search-and-seizure provisions of the Fourth Amendment are all about privacy. To honor this freedom, the Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable” searches and seizures by state or federal law enforcement authorities.

The flip side is that the Fourth Amendment does permit searches and seizures that are reasonable. In practice, this means that the police may override your privacy concerns and conduct a search of you, your home, barn, car, boat, office, personal or business documents, bank account records, trash barrel, or whatever, if:

the police have probable cause to believe they can find evidence that you committed a crime, and a judge issues a warrant, or
the circumstances justify the search without a warrant first being issued.
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961)

Facts: Ohio police officers were looking for a bombing suspect and evidence associated with the bombing at Miss Mapps home. Miss Mapp refused to allow the police to enter her home and the officers then returned to Miss Mapps home with a so called search warrant and forcibly entered the home and conducted a search in which obscene materials were found. Miss Mapp was tired and convicted for the obscene materials.
Issue: Whether evidence discovered during a search and seizure conducted I violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution shall be admissible in a state court?
Holding: The prosecution is not allowed to present evidence that law enforcement secured during a search that was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
Rule: All evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the U.S. Constitution Fourth Amendment, by the same authority, is inadmissible in a state court.

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961). (n.d.). Retrieved February 1, 2020, from            https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/367/643/.

reply with 250 words