Illegal Search and Seizure: The 4th Amendment Explained

The Fourth Amendment protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. It states:

In most cases, government agents need a warrant to search or seize your property. To justify the warrant, the government must prove they have probable cause to believe a crime was committed. To establish probable cause, law enforcement officers submit affidavits that describe their observations or contain information from private citizens or confidential informants explaining why they believe criminal activity is occurring. If the judge finds probable cause exists, the court will issue a warrant authorizing law enforcement to search a specific location for specific evidence.

However, when police violate a suspect’s rights by performing an illegal search, the unlawfully obtained evidence should not be considered at trial. To prevent consideration of illegally obtained evidence, your criminal defense lawyer can file a Motion to Suppress Evidence requesting that any illegally obtained evidence be excluded from consideration.

Navigating the criminal legal process is challenging, and the stakes are high. Working with experienced legal counsel will increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. Elmen Legal represents people accused of crimes in and around Ann Arbor, Michigan. To put our expertise to work for you, contact Elmen Legal today to schedule an appointment to discuss your situation and how we can help.

What Is Probable Cause?

Before law enforcement offices can search your home, your vehicle, or your person, they must have probable cause to believe you committed a crime. Probable cause means they have enough evidence to believe a crime has been or likely will be committed.

When Do Police Need a Warrant?

The US Supreme Court has ruled that police need a warrant to search an area where a person has a “legitimate expectation of privacy.” The Court adopted a two-part test to determine whether a person has a legitimate expectation of privacy:

1. Did the suspect have a subjective expectation that the place to be searched would remain private?
2. Was the suspect’s expectation of privacy objectively reasonable?

When deciding whether to issue a search warrant, the judge must assess the “totality of the circumstances” and the likelihood law enforcement will find evidence of criminal activity. If there is insufficient evidence to support the request for a search warrant, the judge should deny the request.

Police violate a person’s rights when they search without a warrant or under an invalid warrant. Illegally obtained evidence cannot be used at trial to try to convict a criminal defendant.

What Is an Illegal Search and Seizure?

An illegal search and seizure occurs when law enforcement officers conduct a search or seize property without a warrant, absent exigent circumstances, or when a warrant is issued without probable cause.

Exigent Circumstances: Exceptions to the Search Warrant Requirement

There are exceptions when police do not need a warrant to conduct a search.

• Consent. Police do not need a warrant if the suspect consented to the search. This is why criminal defense attorneys advise people never to consent to a search of their property.
• Plain View. Police do not need a warrant when evidence of criminal activity is in “plain view,” which means the officer can see it without searching.
• Search Incident to Arrest. Police do not need a warrant to search the area around a suspect when placing them under arrest. They are authorized to conduct a “protective sweep” to identify potential threats.
• Stop and Frisk. Police “stop and frisk” someone without a warrant if they believe the suspect is unlawfully carrying a firearm. Any evidence discovered is admissible even though the officer did not have a search warrant.
• Exigent Circumstances. Police do not need a warrant if the time needed to request one would jeopardize public safety or lead to the destruction of evidence. Textbook examples are if police believe a suspect will flush drugs down the toilet, if someone is in danger, or they are in “hot pursuit” of a suspect.
• No Fourth Amendment Protection. The Fourth Amendment does not apply to private citizens like security guards. A security guard who searches someone’s property may violate other laws, but not the Fourth Amendment. It only applies to government agents like the police, FBI, and other law enforcement agencies.

Understanding the Exclusionary Rule

If you believe the police unlawfully searched your property, you can file a Motion to Suppress Evidence claiming the search was unlawful and asking that any illegally obtained evidence be excluded from consideration at trial.

Many people mistakenly believe their case will be dismissed if their Motion to Suppress Evidence is successful. This is not entirely accurate. When a Motion to Suppress Evidence is granted, it means the court agrees the evidence was obtained through an illegal search and cannot be presented at trial. However, it does not necessarily mean the case will be dismissed. The prosecutor can still move forward with the case, just without the unlawfully obtained evidence.

As a practical matter, it is often more difficult to prove a defendant guilty without the excluded evidence. This can pave the way for plea bargaining to reduced charges or a substantially reduced sentence. In some cases, a successful Motion to Suppress Evidence will lead to outright dismissal of the case.

Contact Elmen Legal Today

If you believe you were the victim of an illegal search or seizure, Elmen Legal can help. Call (734) 707-8915 or contact Elmen Legal online today to schedule a free, confidential, no-obligation appointment to discuss your situation.