The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution places significant limits on the government’s ability to search the homes and property of citizens. Under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement officers must have a search warrant, issued on a showing of probable cause, in order to search a private home or premises without the consent of the occupants.
However, there are numerous limitations on the requirement that officers obtain warrants prior to search. In certain limited, “exigent” circumstances, police may search a home or other premises without first obtaining a warrant. These circumstances include a good faith belief on the part of the police that:
- a person’s life is in danger;
- evidence might be destroyed;
- or a suspect may be about to escape.
If a person is arrested, officers may search the individual and the immediate area around the person, in a search “incident to an arrest.”
Electronic eavesdropping is regarded as a form of search under the Fourth Amendment. As a result, law enforcement officers must obtain warrants before tapping phones. These warrants are typically issued with very tight limitations on:
- the time period in which they can be conducted;
- the manner in which law enforcement officers must limit eavesdropping on conversations not related to criminal activity.
Under the judge-made “exclusionary rule,” evidence that is seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be introduced as evidence in the trial of a criminal case. The purpose of this rule is to dissuade law enforcement officers from ignoring Fourth Amendment limitations on their right to search in order to obtain evidence of a crime.
See also…