Fourth Amendment Dbq

An argument that is disputed over in today's society is the amount of authority the government has in individuals lives; and more specifically, the control over certain searches and seizures. Supposedly, unconstitutional inspections done makes opponents conjecture if the government has gone extreme with searches, however advocates support the government's rights to scrutinize one's property without ramification. Facts state that the government can do whatever is needed to propose a search, including one without the use of a warrant. In one case, a young man was suspect of growing marijuana in his home. The government used an implement, called the thermal scanner, to look for waves of abnormal heat growing. When found with marijuana, he was …show more content…
The Fourth Amendment guarantees that people are free from any unreasonable search. Justice Potter Stewart writes, “[T]he Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection” (Document A). In DLKs case, his home is what is searched, and according to Stewart, his house is publically exposed to his surroundings, so the marijuana growing is already producing seen heat. This explains that the Fourth Amendment was never violated because “places” as in DLKs home are not being trespassed. Another part of the DLK case is the use of technology. According to DLK, using the thermal imager to find the marijuana growing in his home was an invasion of his privacy due to the fact that he should be under protection of the Fourth Amendment; however, this is untrue. Document E points out, “the use of the thermal imager in this case was not a Fourth Amendment search. The thermal imager detected heat radiating from the exterior of petitioner's house, and it did not invade the home or reveal detailed activities (or indeed any activities) within the home itself” (Document E). According to the author of document E, DLK’s thermal house search was not abusing his Fourth Amendment rights due to the fact that his home was not invaded and his activities within the house itself. The thermal …show more content…
Probable cause is reasonable reasons for doing a search, seizure or pressing charges. In some cases, providing a warrant is not obligatory because the government has probable cause. In one case, a man named Carroll was believed to be selling liquor illegally. The federal agents pulled him over and searched his car. When found guilty of selling the liquor, he attested that the warrantless search was invalid; however, The Supreme Court said that the search was constitutional. Document A states, “The Supreme Court ruled that the warrantless search was valid because otherwise Carroll might drive away and the evidence would disappear”(Document A). Although DLK was not driving a car, he could have easily hid the marijuana or moved in time before the agents came to his house. The government had a right to briskly search the house for heat without a warrant because DLK could have hid evidence of the germination of marijuana. The thermal imager, as stated before, never violated DLK and is another reason for probable cause. The respondent from Document E states, “...as such, the imager represented a permissible means for law enforcement to gather information without previously obtaining a search warrant.” As stated by the respondent, the imager gives plausible means for law enforcement to “gather information” with no warrant needed. The government had previous evidence of

Show More

Related Documents: Fourth Amendment Dbq

Essay about brinkley12AP im ch07