Amendment #4

Jaxon Rollins

What it actually means.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Court case.

A police officer witnessed three men pacing in front of a jewelry store and suspected that a robbery was being planned. He approached the men and identified himself, then performed frisks of defendants Chilton and Terry and discovered illegal concealed weapons. Defendants were convicted and appealed, claiming that the frisk violated their Fourth Amendment right against unlawful searches and seizures.

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding that when a law enforcement officer has "reasonable grounds" for suspecting that a criminal suspect may be armed, he may pat down the outer layer of the suspect's clothing for weapons. The ruling held that the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a pat down is performed based on reasonable suspicion for the purpose of ensuring officer safety.

My Own Court Case

Officer Brown saw two black males walking in front of a gas station. He thought that they were attempting to rob it. He asked them to allowed to be searched. He found two illegal weapons, and the men started to protest. The claimed that their right for searches was being violated and they were both arrested. They went to court and the judge said that the officer had "reason" for searching, since the men looked suspicious.