Research papers 2 pages, words Today a high percentage of the arrests done by law enforcement are from seized evidence that was in plain view and does not come under the Fourth Amendment. The plain view doctrine states that items that are within the sight of a police officer who is legally in a place from which the view is made may properly be seized without a warrant as long as such items are immediately recognizable as subject to seizure Criminal Procedure: Law and Practice
Get Full Essay Get access to this section to get all help you need with your essay and educational issues. The tree in this case represents the source from which evidence may have been obtained while the fruit represents what comes out from this evidence. If such evidence is obtained, then it cannot be accepted in a court of law.
This doctrine is effective in ensuring that police officers do not obtain evidence using any illegal means. Illegal means could in this case be during the conduction of unwarranted searches, illegal arrests or during a coercive cross-examination.
Basically, this doctrine draws the line between what evidence can or cannot be presented to court during a trial Dressler, According to Bransdorfer a number of exceptions have been made in interpreting this evidence meaning that obtained evidence can be accepted in court under certain conditions which include: If the conducted search was done by government officers without any ill intentions; if done in very good faith.
If the evidence would have inevitably been found Open fields doctrine essay in different circumstances. If the evidence was obtained during an independent or different undertaking. If the existing connection between the obtained evidence and the illegal action used to obtain it is deemed as being excessively attenuated Open Fields Doctrine This is a United States Open fields doctrine essay America doctrine created with an aim of making evaluations on claims of unreasonable or illegal searches by government officials violating the 4th amendment.
According to this amendment, members of the public have a right to feel safe in their houses and with their properties. The amendment protects the public from illegal seizures and searches and only allows the issuance of warrants only when there is probable cause to do so.
The warrants give a specific description of the particular place to be searched as well as of the properties or persons to be placed under seizure Zalman, According the open fields doctrine, the 4th amendment does not provide public protection in open areas hereby referred to as fields.
If a police officer for example suspects or has reason to believe that a murder weapon has been hidden in particular public field park, then he or she can authorize for a search for the weapon to be conducted.
If the murder weapon is found, then it can be presented as evidence in the court of law. Officers in Foreign Nations? It is demanded that police officers have warrants before they make any searches within the United States of America as well as its territories.
The situation is however different when the searches have to be conducted in a foreign nation or country such that the officers do not have any kind of authority to move into a country and perform searches on a person they believe to have committed a crime despite the fact that the person in question is a United States national.
In specific cases however, the officers can conduct the searches but only if they have received authorization from the host country or nation and that they have warrants from their own country. In this case the officers are granted what is referred to as an extraterritorial jurisdiction.
The two countries must in this case have had a contractual agreement regarding the undertaking Pakes, In a situation where a US national commits a crime and then migrates into another country or is believed to be in possession of illegal things but in another country, the United States police officers are not in any position to conduct any such in the country where the person has migrated to or is hiding the illegal possessions.
The person is hereby guarded by the constitution or laws of the host country. The two sides are allowed to freely call in their various witnesses and to present their cases in ways they find appropriate. In this case, the final judgment highly depends on the skills of either the defence or the prosecution meaning that a person can be termed as guilty while he or she is not guilty or vice versa.
The judge uses the evidence by the two sides to make the final ruling and thus only acts as an overseer or referee. An inquisitorial system on the other hand is basically that whereby the ruling judges act as active participants in searching for facts and evidence related to the particular cases they are handling Hodgson, The fact the judge takes part in investigating the case reduces the chances of making wrong or unfair rulings making the system an effective way of ensuring that the guilty face their penalties and that the not guilty ones are wet free and not wrongly judged or convicted.
Indiana Law Journal Criminal Justice in Action: Willan Publishing Zalman, M. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: More essays like this:Click the button above to view the complete essay, speech, term paper, or research paper. How to Cite this Page. MLA Citation: "Fourth Amendment Exceptions." around the Oliver property “evinced a reasonable expectation of privacy,” and therefore the court held that the “open fields” doctrine was not applicable to the Oliver case.
Open Fields Doctrine Items in open fields are not protected by the Fourth Amendment and can be taken by an officer without a warrant or probable cause.
The Fourth Amendment protects only "houses, papers, and effects" against unreasonable searches and seizures. One of the exceptions to the search and seizure law which enables police officers to conduct warrantless search and seizure proceedings, especially in criminal cases, is the Open Fields Doctrine.
Plain View/ Open Fields Case Study Essay Words | 4 Pages Roel R. Garcia Plain View / Open Fields Case Study Axia College University of Phoenix Scott Smith September 14, Today a high percentage of the arrests done by law enforcement are from seized evidence that was in plain view and does not come under the Fourth Amendment.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE-OLIVER AND THE OPEN FIELDS DOCTRINE-Oliver v. United States, -U.S.
-, S. Ct. (). INTRODUCTION In recent years, uncertainty has arisen concerning the vitality. The open fields doctrine holds that items in open fields are not protected show more content The officer walked over to the wall and was able to see two juveniles in a fistfight.
Their clothes were ripped, their eyes swollen, and their faces were bleeding.