StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

The Fourth Amendment: Coolidge vs New Hampshire - Term Paper Example

Summary
The essay “The Fourth Amendment: Coolidge vs New Hampshire” focuses on the bill of rights that protects citizens against irrational or unreasonable searches and seizures, along with demanding any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and endorsed by probable cause…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER91.3% of users find it useful
The Fourth Amendment: Coolidge vs New Hampshire
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "The Fourth Amendment: Coolidge vs New Hampshire"

The Fourth Amendment: Coolidge vs New Hampshire The fourth amendment to the constitution of United States is part of the bill of rights that protects citizens against irrational or unreasonable searches and seizures, along with demanding any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and endorsed by probable cause. This clause was adopted as a reaction to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a kind of general search warrant. Search and warrant should be limited and adhering to specific data or information given to the issuing court normally by law enforcement officer. Coolidge, a convicted murderer of a girl, argues that a warrantless search of his automobile and house violates the fourth amendment when there was absence of house warrant and that the car warrant was issued by the Attorney General who was not neutral. This case was about a girl who left home in response to a call for a babysitter. After 8 days, she was found dead. Neighbors reported to the police that Coolidge was out at the time the murder took place. Police went to Coolidge house to question him about the murder. In the course of their questioning, he produced three guns and consented to take a lie detector test. This test included the murder, but, during the process, Coolidge admitted of theft. In his absence, two other police officers came to his house and questioned his wife regarding the murder and collaborate his acceptance of theft. Unaware of other police officers who had been shown the guns and having little information about the murder weapon, the police officers asked about any gun that might be in the house and they were shown four guns which she gave to the officers. One police officer declined the offer, but, they took the guns along with other documents and clothes belonging to Coolidge. On February 19, Coolidge was arrested in his house for being responsible for the murder of the girl and on that date, a warrant to search his house and car was applied by the police and was given or issued by the Attorney General (who has assumed charge of inquiry or investigation and was later the prosecutor at the trial) acting as justice of the peace (Hubbart 67-71). The automobile which at the moment of arrest was parked in Coolidge’s driveway was moved to the police station, where it was searched. Residue from the car sweepings and clothing were applied as evidence at the trial, along with the gun that Coolidge’s wife gave the police officers. They kept and searched the car for more than one year and were successful in finding a little gun residue in the car. Coolidge was convicted of murder by State Supreme Court. The courts decisions on the case The State Supreme Court held that the warrant for the seizure and search of Coolidge’s car did not meet the requirements of the fourth amendment as made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth since it was not given or issued by a detached and neutral magistrate. The US constitution stipulates that searches done outside the judicial process without prior approval by the Supreme judge or magistrate are irrational according to the Fourth amendment only applicable to a few specific and well defined exceptions (Lee 44-46). Basing on the facts of this case, warrantless seizure and search of the car are not reasonable under those exceptions. The seizure of the automobile in the parking cannot be justified as incidental to Coolidge’s arrest, which happened inside the house. Assuming that the police could have properly made warrantless search of the car in the parking lot when they arrested Coolidge, they could not have done so at their own pleasure after its removal. With regards to this case, where the police had the knowledge of the probable role of the automobile in the crime, Coolidge had enough opportunity to destroy incriminating evidence, the house was protected at the moment for arrest and that Coolidge had no access to the automobile. The Court stated that there were exigent scenarios justifying warrantless search even had been provided before the police took the car to the police station. The courts differed on this matter in that some thought it was justifiable by arguing that the police may, without a warrant seize evidence in plain view and when they discover that evidence is inadvertent. While other courts held that it was unacceptable according to the fourth amendment of exceptional provision. There was seizure and search implicated when the police visited Coolidge’s house and obtained clothing and guns from his wife and hence they needed no warrant to do so. The police did not force her to produce the guns and clothes and in giving these items to the police officer, Coolidge’s wife did not act as agents of the police. The court believed that there was enough evidence to sentence Coolidge to prison for the murder. The courts differed on the ruling stating that the warrant authorizing for the search and seizure of Coolidge’s car was not valid because it was not issued by neutral and detached magistrate. Therefore, they hold that because the warrant search was invalid, it was good if the Court considered further arguments that the allegations under the oath justifying the issuance of the warrant were so conclusory in order to violate relevant constitutional standards under the fourth amendment (Clancy 41-43). The matter of fourth amendment which is not understood by zealous officers is not that it hinders enforcement of law, but, the endorsement of the usual inferences which rational men get evidence. Its guard comprises in demanding that those inferences be drawn or made by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by a justice involved in the often competitive activity of ferreting out crime. Any assumption that available evidence is sufficient to support a judge or magistrate disinterested determination to give or issue a search and seizure warrant will justify the police officers in conducting the search without a warrant would reduce the amendment to nullity and leave people secure in the discretion of police men. However, the right of privacy is essential and must rationally yield to the right of search and seizure as a rule of law in the constitution to be decide by a judicial personnel not a police man as in this case of Coolidge Vs. New Hampshire. The government enforcement agent “the Attorney General” was responsible for determination of probable cause in this case. The attorney was actively in charge of the investigation and chief prosecutor at the trial (Rago 88-93). The New Hampshire Supreme court in justifying the conviction depended much on the theory that, even if the warrant process and procedure here in question or issue would violate the standards imposed on the Federal government by the fourth amendment. They endorsed their decision to convict Coolidge despite differing opinions on the case. Summarily, the probable cause, warrantless arrests may not be provided in the home where there is lack of exigent circumstances. It is vital that the person issuing the search and seizure warrant be neutral and detached to avoid infringement on people’s life. In addition, the court has held that not all probable cause arrests without warrant in home must be supported by exigent circumstances other the necessity of arresting a robber. Therefore, in this case, where some justices chose to dissent and concur in part, the court stated that the searches and seizures of Coolidge’s house and car were unconstitutional. Judge Steward argued that the warrant authorizing the seizure of Coolidge’s car was invalid since it was not given by a neutral and detached magistrate. In addition, he rejected New Hampshire’s arguments in favor of providing an exception to the warrant requirements. He justified his rejection by stating that neither the plain view nor incident to arrest justified the search and that the car exception was not applicable. On the other hand, the court held that, although automobile exception exists, the word automobile is not an object in whose present the fourth amendment disappears. Works Cited Clancy, Thomas. The Fourth Amendment: Its History and Interpretation. Carolina: Carolina Academic Press, 2008. Print. Hubbart, Philip. Making Sense of Search and Seizure Law: A Fourth Amendment Handbook. Carolina: Carolina Academic Press, 2008. Print. Lee, Cynthia. Searches and Seizures: The Fourth Amendment: Its Constitutional History and Contemporary Debate. New York: Prometheus Books, 2010. Print. Rago, John. Forensic Science and Law: Investigative Applications in Criminal, Civil and Family Justice. Washington, DC: CRC Press, 2005. Print. Read More

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF The Fourth Amendment: Coolidge vs New Hampshire

Perry v. New Hampshire

The jurisdiction of the criminal law is thus so strong in the case of Perry v new hampshire because it ensures both the defendant and prosecutor the ability to provide their evidences as this is the ultimate way to deal with both parties a reasonably fair or unbiased procedure in the proceedings of the case.... Thus, its power should not be undermined with suggestive circumstances such as found in the case of Perry v new hampshire.... new hampshire, the former tried to amend the verdict of the state because of his right or privilege to amend....
3 Pages (750 words) Term Paper

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution

The paper "the fourth amendment to the US Constitution" explains that there are three approaches to the interpretation of the Amendment: the Warrant Approach, the Reasonableness Approach, and the Special Needs Doctrine, all of which are presented and defined and illustrated by various cases.... The Warrant Approach Before the 1960s, the courts approached the interpretation of the fourth amendment by closely linking the two clauses on reasonableness and warrant....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay

The United States Constitutional History: Fourth Amendment

This research paper "The United States Constitutional History: Fourth Amendment" focuses on the core purpose of the fourth amendment which is to safeguard individual security.... Though, out of those the fourth amendment is of vital importance and holds a significant place in US Constitution.... owever, it is observed that the fourth amendment has been a victim of different controversies and is regarded as an issue by the US Constitution-making authorities and a few other elements....
14 Pages (3500 words) Research Paper

Incident With Police Officers

Under the United States Constitution's fourth amendment:".... Two police officers were patrolling in high crime neighborhood.... They noticed a parked car with two people inside (a driver and a passenger).... The officer saw a young women leaning into the passenger an object, which they could not identify....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 1987 U.S. Lexis 1056 (1987)

new hampshire (403 U.... new hampshire, 403 U.... Issue:The main issue in this case is whether the initial entry into the respondent's apartment, and the subsequent recording of the serial numbers on the stereo equipment constituted a violation of fourth amendment rights.... The Supreme Court reasoned that the police violated the respondent's fourth amendment rights when they embarked on a search not justified by the first facts....
2 Pages (500 words) Assignment

Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment Rights

The issue of the case was whether the fourth amendment of the U.... The essay "Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment Rights" focuses on the critical analysis of the major issues on the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendment rights.... he defendant provided incriminating evidence when police were interrogating him without notifying him of his constitutional rights provided under the Fifth amendment of the U.... Moreover, the signed confessions contained a clause that, stated that the accused was aware of his rights during the interrogation as provided in the Fifth amendment of the U....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

A Warrant of Arrest Issued by a Court

the fourth amendment to the United States provides that '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'....
13 Pages (3250 words) Case Study

The Fourteenth Amendment Analysis

the fourth amendment protects against unreasonable searches, and entry, but gives an exemption when there exists a probable cause to conduct the search.... In Alabama vs.... The Supreme Court in Carol vs.... The main aim of this paper is to analyze such issues as reasonable suspicion, arrest warrants, and exigent circumstances using real court cases....
3 Pages (750 words) Article
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us