This is a Complaint pleading for use in litigation of the title matter. Adapt this form to comply with your facts and circumstances, and with your specific state law. Not recommended for use by non-attorneys.
4 Exceptions To The 4th Amendment In Chicago
Category:
State:
Multi-State
City:
Chicago
Control #:
US-000280
Format:
Word;
Rich Text
Instant download
Description
Free preview
Form popularity
FAQ
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement Exigent circumstances. Plain view. Search incident to arrest. Consent.
Martin J. King J.D. This article describes the “special needs” exception which applies to searches and seizures conducted without individualized suspicion for the purpose of minimizing a risk of harm.
The circumstances under which the law deems a warrantless search, seizure, or arrest reasonable generally fall within the following seven categories: For a felony arrest in a public place. When directly related to a lawful arrest. During a traffic stop for reasonable suspicion.
For instance, a warrantless search may be lawful, if an officer has asked and is given consent to search; if the search is incident to a lawful arrest; if there is probable cause to search, and there is exigent circumstance calling for the warrantless search.
Other well-established exceptions to the warrant requirement include consensual searches, certain brief investigatory stops, searches incident to a valid arrest, and seizures of items in plain view.
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule Searches made during a lawful arrest. Evidence found in plain view of an officer. Searches made with the consent of the person or property owner. "Good faith" reliance on a defective warrant.
The single-purpose container exception allows for the warrantless search of a container that is so distinctive that its contents are a foregone conclusion and can therefore be said to be in plain view.
Decision: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. The high court said evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.
Now the Exclusionary Rule is a judicially created remedy that excludes evidence that's been collected by law enforcement officers when the officers violated the Constitution.
The Exclusionary Rule, which prevents the use of illegally obtained evidence in court, was first established by the Supreme Court in Weeks v. United States (1914). It was later expanded to state courts in Mapp v. Ohio (1961).