Fourth Amendment, Essay Example

What additional exceptions should there be?

Warrant requirements in some situations would needlessly interfere with the law enforcement process. Therefore, additional exceptions to the Fourth Amendment Warrant Requirement should be done. Some of these additional exceptions include:

• Seizure of contraband
• Search of gambling areas such as Casinos
• Full search a person under arrest (Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969)
• Search of a vehicle of an arrested person

Why these additional exceptions?

These exceptions should be included because the need for public good and public safety is much more important than just privacy interests of a single person. In such cases, it is unreasonable for the requirement of a search or seizure warrant since this in most cases interferes with the law enforcement process at the same time delaying application of justice.

For example in the case of seizing a contraband it makes very little sense to require the police officer to obtain a search warrant in order to be able to seize contraband that is so plainly in view. Since the Fourth Amendment requires reasonableness for a search or seizure to take place, then it should also apply the same in the searches that should be done where the requirement of a search warrant is obviously unreasonable. The same applies in cases of searching a gambling area like a casino. The welfare of the public whose money is swindled is more important than the privacy interests of the Casino owner. When there is probable cause, then it is unreasonable for the requirement of a search warrant. Someone who has already been put under arrest is subject to a full search (Harr & Hess, 2006). For example in case of Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969), it was reasonable for the police officer to search the arrested person any weapons that the person would have used to resist arrest. In the same breath, it is reasonable for arresting police officer to search the vehicle of the arrested person to avoid the concealment or evidence. Therefore these exceptions should be included.

Reference

Harr, J. S., & Hess, K. M. (2005). Constitutional law and the criminal justice system (Third ed., pp. 219-221, 226-228, 230-232, 234). United States: Thomson Wadswor

Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969),