Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ken H

I am merely pointing out what the amendment says. Most of the commentary I am seeing is asserting that the 4th amendment was violated because searches were conducted without a warrant. That is NOT a violation of the 4th amendment. Read the amendment and see.


106 posted on 04/23/2013 7:56:47 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: Arthur McGowan
Most of the commentary I am seeing is asserting that the 4th amendment was violated because searches were conducted without a warrant.

The Fourth Amendment still controls. When an officer swears an affidavit in support of a search warrant based upon probable cause, he receives a warrant that states, on its face, the particular place to be searched and the particular items or person to be seized.

Exigency must still comport with the remainder of the Fourth even if the warrant requirement is excluded. Exigency only applies to a particular place, not a 20-block radius.

109 posted on 04/23/2013 8:46:37 AM PDT by 101stAirborneVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson