-
Period: to
Fourth Amendment Court Cases
-
Terry vs. Ohio
Was a court case that decided that if a police officer frisks someone without warrant for arrest, it is not a violation of the fourth admendment as long as the police officer has reasonable supiscion to search person. -
US vs. Martinez-Fuerte
A court case that determined that it is a necessity to check cars and persons at the border of Mexico and that this is not a violation of the fourth admendent. Martinez itniated the court case when he was caught with two illegal aliens while crossing the border. Martinez asserted that by searching his car, they were violating his right to the fourth admendment. -
Delaware vs. Prouse
Made it so that a police officer could not stop a car just out of suspicion or to just check if the driver has a license. -
Brown vs. Texas
This court case ruled that it was agaisnt the rights of the fourth admendment for a police officer to ask a person to identify themselves with out probable cause for doing so, such as: commiting a crime, about to commit a crime, or has already committed the crime. -
Florida vs. Wells
In this case, a man named Wells was arrested for driving under the influence. Upon his arrival at the police station, he was told that his car would be compounded and consented to a request to open his trunk. When his trunk was open, two marijuana cigarette butts were found in ashtray. When his suitcase was opened, a considerable amount of marijuana was found. Because they had no policy of opening a closed container during an inventory search, it was considered a violation of the 4th Amendment. -
Michgan vs. Sitz
In this case, a random sobriety checkpoint was set up one night. A group of Michigan residents sued on the grounds that their Fourth Amendment rights were being violated. They said that because the checkpoint was unmarked and random, their rights prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure were being violated. The court said that the search was appropriate due to reasonable suspicion. The court was in favor of the government. -
Florida vs. Bostick
In this case, a bus bound from Miami to Atlanta was pulled over in Fort Lauderdale Florida. Two narcotics officers boarded the bus, and told the driver (Bostick) that they needed to see his ID. After searching it over, the officers asked to search the man's bus. In his suitcase they found cocaine. This case is essential to the Fourth Amendment becuase they did not tell Bostick that he could refuse to let them search his bus. The search was also not properly conducted, as it was on a bus. -
Minnesota vs. Carter
Two men were packing cocaine into bags, when a police officer was watching through a hole in the blinds. He called and received his warrants, and the two men were arrested. They said their fourth amendments rights were violated, but Chief Justice Rehnquist said their rights weren't violated, because it wasn't their home and the expectation of privacy was too high. -
Bond vs. United States
Bond was travelling to Little Rock, AR from California and was carrying in his bag a brick of methamphetamines. They came to border patrol, and the patrol man took Bond's bag and through the bag could feel the brick. Bond was arrested and sentenced to 57 months in jail. But in the appeal, the patrolman's actions were unconstitutional, because Bond's intent was that his bag would be kept private and the patrolman violated his rights. -
Board of Education vs. Earls
The Board of Education in Tecumseh, Oklahoma was challenged by the families of Lindsay Earls and Daniel James, because they were required to take urinalyisis test, if they wanted to participate in an extracurricular activity. Justice Clarence Thomas deemed that it didn't violate their Fourth Amendment rights, because participating in extracurriculars means they didn't require as much personal privacy as ordinary students.