Fourth Amendment Case
Study
For
this week's discussion, assume that you are a member of the US Supreme Court.
Consider this case:
Police suspected a man was growing marijuana
inside his home. Late at night, the police (without stepping on the suspect's
property) used a heat-sensing device to determine that part of the defendant's
home was substantially warmer than the other homes in the area. In the
detective's experience, that kind of heat signature indicated the use of indoor
"grow lights." Based on this information, the detective obtained a
warrant to search the house and indeed did find an indoor marijuana-growing
operation.
The defendant was convicted but has appealed
claiming the use of the heat sensor without his approval and without a warrant
violated his rights. He believes any evidence related to the heat sensor should
have been excluded from the case (and, really, the warrant should not have been
issued based on the heat sensor information).
After reading this, I decided to look and see if I could
actually find anything on this case. I am not actually sure if I found the
actual case itself, but I did find this:
Therefore I decided to read the information listed on the
site, and learn everything about the case I did find. Relevant or not, it is in
fact similar.
Both, (or if this is in fact the same case, I don’t want to
misquote) whatever the case may be: are a violation of the right that we have
chosen to stand behind, rights by which we are entitled and given, by our
forefathers.
If we cannot honor the Constitution, and our own laws, than
what good are our laws in the first place? This shows lack of respect and
validity towards us, let alone one another and our own laws.
After taking all of that information in, I decided to review
again, the fourth amendment and found this:
This way, I could be refreshed on that, in case I had any
other questions regarding the amendment in question.
Again, a law written by our forefathers, intended to protect
us.
Then, if I can, you want me to demonstrate how the above case
relates to the issue of crime control versus due process models of criminal
justice.
My opinion, towards the above case in question is simple.
Officers in question were out to get drugs off the street, and felt they had
something or someone big. And/or perhaps even a big fish, and felt that if they
could catch this perpetrator and get a big lead onto something else, which in
turn may lead to something or someone else. Which yes, eventually does. And
yes, if we’re honest with one another, sometimes the Police do invent and
create things to get things done. Even if they say, or pretend they don’t-
because more often than not, it’s kept off the books, it is a lie. But it is
often for the common good. However, again: yes there are also corrupt cops, even
though we don’t care to admit that as well.
Now let us not forget, drugs are a big problem, for both
Children and Adults. And there are a lot of competitors. And a lot of the
competitors, do have police on their pay roll; also something people do tend to
keep under hat. But the fact that the Police avoided a claim of due of process
for this case, could have been an issue of “getting even” with a war on drugs
of “competition” or anything. What we don’t ever know is the entire story. That
is seriously where the problem lies.
I’m to conclude with an explanation of how I would rule in
such a case:
Seriously I cannot stand drugs or drug dealers. For the
longest time I wanted to be a DEA officer, but as much as I hate drugs, and
drug dealers, I feel I would be more danger to them than a benefit, if that
makes any sense.
However, I am a firm believer in my amendments and the fact
that they were put here and for a reason. Now again, please bear with me, that
I do agree that the amendments do need updated and changed and fixed in certain
areas because yes- times have changed. But many of the amendments are quite
reasonable, and those men in those early years knew how to respect us as
people, and our rights. Fortunately, for us now, with the way the World has
changed, that these were put into play. Even though, yes, as I read about this
case. It does say, our times are changing, and soon, we will not be able to
stand by the fourth amendment for protection. And personally I feel that is a
violation of our constitutional right. We were given our rights, and by God, we
need to respect one another, and those rights.
