The simple version of the Fourth Amendment is indeed simple. It’s fewer than 100 words, so we’ll reproduce the whole thing here.
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 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.
However, as is usually the case in criminal law, there’s much more to the story. Some people want the law to come bustin’ in at the first sign of trouble, while others cling to the castle doctrine, at least in this context. More on that below.
Fourth Amendment violations may be the most common procedural defense in possession cases, like drug possession. The Fourth Amendment also limits initial law enforcement contacts, a procedural defense that could apply in most cases. Procedural defenses are important tools in the toolbox of a Marietta criminal defense lawyer. The defendant could be “guilty” in every sense of the word. But if police officers violated procedure, guilt or innocence is irrelevant. When officers don’t follow the law, prosecutors often abandon the case.
Background
We know that history lessons are sometimes dull. But this background information helps us make sense of current problems. At least that’s what our college history professors diligently argued.
The roots of this provision in the Bill of Rights, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, date back to the Semayne’s Case of 1607. In that case, Sir Edward Coke ruled that “The house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence as for his repose.”
This holding eventually gave birth to the castle doctrine in self-defense cases. More importantly for purposes of this blog, it established the principle that authorities did not have unbridled authority to intrude on his subjects’ dwellings, but government agents could conduct searches and seizures under certain conditions.
In the 1760s, English courts used this holding to overturn random searches targeting dissident newspapers and other publications. But on the other side of the Pond, American colonists didn’t get the same protection. In fact, authorities issued general warrants, which gave law enforcement officers almost unlimited power to search for anything at any time, with very little oversight.
After the American Revolution, many people rightly feared that “president” was a pseudonym for “king.” During the war, people addressed George Washington as “Your Excellency.” Future second President John Adams even suggested “Your Highness” and “Your Most Benign Highness.” To calm these fears, the Founding Fathers tacked the Fourth Amendment onto the Constitution.
Law Enforcement Detentions
Search and seizure limitations are the heart and soul of the Fourth Amendment. But before we discuss them, we should discuss law enforcement detention limitations. If the stop was illegal, the search is automatically illegal, warrant or no warrant.
Officers must have reasonable suspicion to detain suspects. Usually, reasonable suspicion is an offense committed in plain view or an evidence-based hunch of criminal activity.
Usually, a plain view offense is a traffic infraction. This infraction could be very obscure, such as a license plate frame that partially obscures any information on the plate, such as “Georgia.” Evidence-based hunches are normally person-to-person stops, like a suspicious person on a street corner.
Exceptions
Reliable informer tips are an exception to the reasonable suspicion rule. For example, Officer Jones sees an SUV run a red light. She radios ahead to Officer Smith, who stops the SUV even though she has no Fourt Amendment basis for that stop.
Concerned citizen tips aren’t as reliable. Usually, these tipsters have mixed motives, at best. Anonymous tipsters are almost per se unreliable. A Marietta criminal defense lawyer can’t cross-examine an anonymous tipster in court.
DUI roadblocks are the other primary exception. At an organized checkpoint, officers can detain motorists without reasonable suspicion. These roadblocks must meet certain requirements. For example:
- A high supervisor, like the police chief, must authorize the checkpoint,
- The agency must publicize the checkpoint in advance,
- Field officers must deploy signs, lights, traffic cones, and other safety measures,
- Motorist delay must be limited to under about thirty seconds, and
- Field officers cannot alter the neutral formula used to detain vehicles (e.g. one out of every four cars), except in limited circumstances.
These checkpoints don’t affect Fifth Amendment rights. Drivers don’t have to answer questions or even roll down their windows.
Police Searches
As stated in the Fourth Amendment’s text, judges must have probable cause affidavits to issue search warrants. Probable cause is a higher standard than reasonable suspicion, but it’s lower than beyond a reasonable doubt (the standard of evidence at trial).
We mentioned unreliable informers above. This issue plagues many search warrants, as officers tend to over-rely on paid informers.
Additionally, warrants must be limited in terms of time, place, and activity. For example, officers may search 313 Lawrence St. NE today for drugs. They cannot search 313 Lawrence St. NE tomorrow for illegal weapons.
Exceptions
Mostly in the 1960s, the Supreme Court carved out some search warrant exceptions. Plain view, a concept mentioned above, may be the most common search warrant exception. If officers see contraband in plain view, and the law enforcement contact was legal, they may seize that contraband.
The consent exception is almost as common. Owners may consent to police searches. Consent is an affirmative, voluntary act. An owner may also be an apparent owner, like a driver who doesn’t own the car.
Other exceptions include exigent circumstances and hot pursuit. Officers may enter buildings without warrants to perform safety checks. Furthermore, if a suspect hides in a building, officers may continue the pursuit without warrants.
In simple terms, the Fourth Amendment could be a lifesaver. For a free consultation with an experienced Marietta criminal defense lawyer, contact The Phillips Law Firm, LLC. We routinely handle matters in Cobb County and nearby jurisdictions.
