Fernandez V. California Case Study

Words: 451
Pages: 2

In the cases Georgia v. Randolph and Fernandez v. California they each had similarities. Though, the Fernandez v. California case, the defendant was arrested leaving only one tenant home, and in the Georgia v. Randolph case both tenants were present, making the incidents different, as well. Police felt they had probable cause in each of the incidents because of statements made by others claiming their crimes. Each case had defendants stating, that what the police had done by searching their homes without a warrant, even though they were given permission from another occupant in their homes, it still can be fought in court as unconstitutional. In both cases, the defendant was still found guilty a crime but fought the possible charges that were established during the search of their homes; these included possession of drugs and possession of weapons and other gang paraphernalia. The fourth amendment states that Americans have the right to be secure in their home and other property against …show more content…
In the Georgia v. Randolph case, their ruling resulted in favor for the defendant because law enforcement broke the rules of the constitution. In the case Fernandez v. California, the defendant was arrested for domestic abuse; the defendant has no rights at this point and the other occupant giving access to the home is completely legal.
The decisions were both consistent because they both came to a conclusion that was reviewed by judges and the fourth amendment rules and made the decision fairly based on each scenario. I do think things like illegal drugs, illegally owned weapons, etc. should be taken off the streets, but law enforcement should do it the right way and not cut corners and in these cases, I do feel that for Fernandez v. California this made a positive impact on law enforcement and attorney’s but for the Georgia v. Randolph this made a negative impact because they did not follow the