Examining Police Powers: Arrests, Searches, and Seizures under American Constitutional Law - Research Paper Sample

The police have both the legal and the common law powers to conduct searches and arrests under the American Constitutional law in the exercise of their functions (Deahl, 2018). However, there has always been a lot of controversy regarding the specific scope of “search accompanying arrest.” In practice, the police often search the personal belongings of individuals suspected of crime, such as suitcases, handbags, wallets, envelopes, and cigarette boxes, without a search warrant. In various instances, the police have found some criminal evidence from these items and consequently been able to prevent further crimes from being conducted. Although this approach has attracted a lot of criticism, the US Supreme Court has not clearly determined that such an approach violates the Constitution. Instead, various legislations have outlined precedents that guide and control the exercise of police powers. This paper investigates the legal framework that authorizes the police to conduct the functions of searching, arresting, and seizure, including the limitations to the exercise of police power. Only in some exceptional circumstances can the police conduct an “undocumented search” without the permission of the court (McGlynn, 2017).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

One of the most common situations is to search the suspect’s body and the surrounding environment at close range during the arrest of a criminal suspect in accordance with the law. This exception ensures the safety of the police and prevents the suspect from harming the police with weapons carried or within the suspect’s reach. Also, the exception allows the police to preserve evidence and prevent the suspect from destroying or concealing guilty evidence. From a legal standpoint, the police have an obligation to use discretion and proportionality to conduct searches, seizures and arrests of persons suspected of crime for the protection of public interest.

Literature Review

Understanding Searches and Seizures

Arrests refers to the behavior of temporarily restricting a person's personal freedom when the police have reason to suspect that they have committed, is or is about to commit a crime, and its purpose is to stop the continuation of the crime or prevent the occurrence of the crime. "Pattern search" refers to a physical examination of a person when the police believe that someone is carrying a weapon and thus poses a threat to himself or others. This search is not a full-body search, nor can it be used to find evidence of crimes other than weapons. An undocumented search is an exception to the legal requirement that "a search warrant is required for a search", just as an arrest without a license is an exception to the legal requirement that an arrest warrant is required for an arrest.

The Legality and Authority of Police Power

The US Constitution does not establish any national police, even though it empowers the central government to exercise police power over certain crimes. According to US political tradition, it is constitutionally incumbent upon States to carry out most policing activities (Bach, 2017). The states, in turn, transfer to the local communities (counties and municipalities) much of the power of police inspection, which is effectively exercised by the so-called “local police.” The state police coordinate their activities with the local police to complement the public security activities of the municipalities and counties, whenever local resources are not sufficient.

The institutional mission of each category of the American police is precisely defined. Federal police organizations are responsible for preventing and suppressing criminal activities of articulation and occurrence typically at the national level (organized crime, smuggling, embezzlement, etc.), or whose nature impacts the country as a whole (drug trafficking, terrorism, etc.) (Bach, 2017). State police organizations fill the transition areas between different counties and municipalities (mainly on highways) and exercise routine ostensive policing, in addition to local organizations, whenever the resources of the latter are not sufficient.

Police Power has the objective of protecting and guaranteeing public order. The police, to perform their function, have the prerogative of restricting individual freedoms, in the name of preserving the public interest (Trinkner et al., 2018). The police approach, the police search, and the search and seizure consist of administrative acts performed by police agents, in which they act directly in the specific case for the application of the law.

Although the police search is a discretionary act, it finds legal limitations within which the police officer must act, under penalty of acting with arbitrariness or abuse of power (McGlynn, 2017). Administrative acts performed by police officers must be guided by the principle of proportionality. This principle decides that administrative acts are only valid when exercised to the extent and intensity proportional to what is actually demanded to fulfill the public interest purpose to which they are subordinated.

Police acts are not exhaustively regulated by constitutional or infraconstitutional rules, so it is necessary to use constitutional and doctrinal parameters to better analyze the phenomena that occur. Arrests, searches, and seizures are sensitive issues, as they involve the matter of preserving order and social well-being in return for individual freedoms, especially the fundamental guarantees of privacy and intimacy, which protect citizens in their personal, intimate and confidential spheres (Johnson & Stephens, 2018). In the US, Jurisprudential analysis has been of paramount importance in accompanying the judgment of US courts on specific cases.

The Fifth Amendment and Miranda Rights

The Miranda rights, based on the Miranda v. Arizona case in 1966 by the US Supreme Court (In the case of 384U.S. 436 (1966)), established the Miranda rule which asserts that before interrogating criminal suspects, they must be clearly informed that they have the right to invoke the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution (Pearl, 2017). The Fifth Amendment refers to the confession and its requirements of voluntariness and all the circumstances. Confessions obtained through physical violence against suspects are not admitted to court based on the idea that interrogation is part of the process by which a State imposes a sentence and is therefore subject to the requirements of due process. Sentences based on forced confessions have to be annulled "not because they are unlikely to be true, but because the methods used to obtain them violate an underlying principle in the execution of our criminal law: that ours is an accusatory and not an inquisitorial system. " (Rogers vs. Richmond, 1961). Under the amendment, criminal suspects have the “privilege not to be forced to incriminate themselves” and exercise the right to silence and request a lawyer.

Methodology

The question of the powers and limits of police administrative acts is very intricate since the legislation dealing with the subject is not sufficient to cover up everyday situations. It is necessary to resort to general constitutional rules, doctrine, and understanding of the courts, including foreign jurisprudence, that enriches the debate due to the universality of the theme. In this case, this paper applies a jurisprudential analysis methodology on the judgment of US courts on specific cases. Thus, through the study of concrete cases and their interpretations by the courts, constitutional amendments, and other legislation, the debate between police powers, fundamental rights, and the protection of the public interest is explored.

Findings and Discussion

Police Power in Arrests, Searches, and Seizures

US federal law provides that arrests in federal proceedings should be made by federal law enforcement officers or other officials authorized by the law. According to Article 41, Paragraph 3 of the US Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the validity period of a search warrant is ten days. Therefore, once the search warrant is approved, law enforcement officers must execute it immediately to prevent its rationality from being affected by the transit of the incident. Law enforcement officers are required to declare their identity and present a search warrant during the search (McGlynn, 2017). The search warrant is only used in places and not in persons. The search of the person must be carried out after the arrest.

The Fourth Amendment provides few exceptions that allow the police to conduct arrests, searches, and seizures without a warrant (Bach, 2017; Johnson et al., 2018):

If there is reason to believe that criminal evidence can be obtained, or the person involved is a repeat offender, their car can be searched.

If the police have reason to believe that the opponent is an armed, dangerous person, they can be intercepted and searched. However, the search is limited to weapons used to resist arrest.

When there is an arrest warrant, the police may conduct an undocumented search of the person involved, the area directly affected, and the items to be brought to the detention center.

Search in an emergency - When personal or property is in danger, or important criminal evidence is about to be destroyed, law enforcement officers can conduct an undocumented search. In this regard, Justice Remquist said on behalf of the US Supreme Court: “The Fourth Constitutional Amendment does not require the police to simply shrug their shoulders when there is no reason for arrest, and helplessly listen to any crime, or let a criminal escape.”

When there is a reason for arrest, a necessary and limited search can be conducted to preserve evidence that can be easily destroyed.

The search under the principle can be clearly seen at a glance. In the process of conducting a warrant-based search, the police may seize items that are accidentally discovered and related to crimes but not listed on the search warrant. However, these items must be clearly visible to the police at a glance during legal operations, and they must not be known in advance.

Searches for official seizures - The police may conduct an undocumented search of the items detained or confiscated according to law.

A search on a voluntary basis is a legal search, even if the volunteer does not know that they have the right to refuse the search.

Border search - Law enforcement officers may conduct unlicensed searches of people, luggage, ships, vehicles, etc. entering the United States.

Discretionary powers are also used as a basis for supporting police litigation in a series of appeal rulings. As demonstrated in Whren v. United States, 517 US 806 (1996), discretionary power means that when the police deem it “must and necessary,” they can decide on their own the extent of actions they will take when implementing specific laws, and they can independently choose which laws to enforce or not to implement (Hardaway, 2020). If the police deem it necessary to use lethal weapons or coercive means, and failure to do so may cause greater threats to public safety, then “Discretionary power” prevails.

The Limitations of Police Power

The American Bill of Rights protects the people against improper government interference. A reasonable search requires a search warrant issued by a judge or a Probable Cause that can be proved by the police (Deahl, 2018). The police must have certain evidence to prove that the suspect has broken the law, or may be about to break the law, before conducting a search on them and their belongings. The probable cause requirement derives from the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that the right of individuals to the security of their person, home, documents, and effects against unreasona...