Question

What constitutes a legal or an illegal search and seizure? What are some cases that involve the application of this Amendment? What are controversial issues relating to this Amendment? What is the "fruit of the poisonous tree"?

Answer 1

What constitutes a legal or an illegal search and seizure? First of all, there are various number of Legal precedents and facts applicable those constitute Legal or illegal search and seizure, let me explain point by point: In Katz Versus United state; 1967, Initially, courts must evaluate that whether a person has any reasonable expectation to privacy or not, further whether or not such expectation would be collectively recognized by the society In Mapp versus Ohio; 1961, Courts has evaluated exclusionary rule, which makes mandatory to the event that any illegal seizure evidence can’t be used against defendants in criminal proceedings, The Exclusionary rule doesn’t mean any changes will be managed in cases with illegal seizure evidence, as prosecutors can have enough evidence, those obtained legally for further processing Illegal seizure evidence can’t be used by Law enforcement as probable cause for further searches of evidence through legal precedents and facts, such thing can be known as the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine It is rare case that self presented defendants have good level of evidence taken off due to Fourth amendment law and protections, due to again more complex legal procedure, further precedents need to be argued and filed correctly before the trial, Again fourth amendment law protect privacy rights of the private citizens from government officials, the terms illegal search and seizure might be applied to government officials and legal enforcement, again it might be illegal that private citizens like private security team, Landlord, Employer, have free right in invading privacy, in such case they need to accept criminal penalties due to the actions done,

What are some cases that involve the application of this Amendment? Following are the cases involve the application of this amendment like, The Plain sight doctrine: If the law enforcement personnel has legal right to be in plain sight and can smell parts of any illegal contraband, in such situation, they have obvious right to create seizure for this contraband and create evidence and further arrest the individuals, again if any such personnel finds any items illegally, then contraband should be seized but may not be used as evidence in the criminal courts Searches of drivers and Passengers by traffic stop: To search driver, passenger and vehicle by the traffic stop, in such situation Law enforcement officials must have probable cause to start that search, they further can perform at stop and frisk, which permit officers to pat down that person, such process done to protect safety of the officers,

What are controversial issues relating to this Amendment? The Exclusionary rule and effectiveness of such rule, regarded as controversial issue for application to state proceedings since 1961, there is critics on it and tells that such exclusionary rule hampers police investigation and guilty party may be freed, however that party convicted on reliable evidence, Another critics that that rule has not become successful for deterring illegal police searches, again number of criminal conviction overturned under this exclusionary rule is very minimal as argued by proponents, those here are controversial issues relating to this amendment,

What is the "fruit of the poisonous tree"? Illegal seizure evidence can’t be used by Law enforcement as probable cause for further searches of evidence through legal precedents and facts, such thing can be known as the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine