Deck 5: Police and the Law

Question 1

Should the police be allowed to stop citizens randomly and search for evidence?

Answer 1

Stop and frisk rule:
Stop and frisk rule is a fourth amendment and it requires that the police must have a reasonable doubt that a crime is going to be done or is being done before stopping any suspect for questioning. If the police have reasonable doubt on the suspect, then they can conduct a search or frisk. Frisk is a quick pat down on the outer clothing of the suspect.
Determine whether the police can stop and frisk randomly for evidence:
The police should not stop and search citizens randomly. There must be some reasonable doubt on that citizen. If the police observe a behavior or have a reasonable doubt on the person that he or she is going to commit or has committed the crime, only then the police must stop and frisk the suspect.
At the time of frisk, if police seizes an arm or weapon from the suspect, then he or she is legally under stop and frisk rule and the suspect must give reason for holding arms. The police must apply the rule of stop and frisk only when there is reasonable doubt on the person.
Conclusion:
Stop and frisk rule is a legal stop of the suspect for search of evidence, but the police can stop only with reasonable doubt on that person. Police cannot stop any citizen randomly without any reasonable doubt on that person of committing crime.

Question 2

Are warrantless searches necessary? Are there situations in which a warrantless search should be permitted?

Answer 2

Warrantless search:
The term "warrantless search" means that it is a search process by the police without warrant. It is a permissible open field search and it is a helpful tool for the police mostly during drug war.
Determine whether warrantless search is necessary:
Warrantless search is very important for the police to arrest suspects and this search mostly helps in drug war to get evidence against suspects. Warrantless search is a tool for the police to search in the suspect's area with a reasonable doubt or evidence.
Determine the situation when the court should allow warrantless search:
• If the owner of the search place itself allows or permits to search his or her property. This situation is known as consent search.
• If the police officer suspects any evidence of criminal activity or any weapon before entering the search area, then the police can perform warrantless search. This kind of situation is known as plain view doctrine.
• If the police want to arrest the drug dealer, they can enter into the property without a warrant. This situation is known as open field search.
Conclusion:
Warrantless search is a search process by the police in the private property of the suspect without having any warrant, but with a reasonable doubt. The police conduct these searches mostly during drug wars in order to get evidence against drug dealers.

Question 3

When should third parties be permitted to give police consent to search the residence of another person? What relationship should exist between the person who gives consent and the suspect in order to allow permission to be granted?

Answer 3

Warrantless search:
The term "warrantless search" means that it is a search process by the police without warrant. It is a permissible open field search and it is a helpful tool for the police mostly during drug war.
Determine when the third party gives consent to search the residence of another person:
Police may perform a warrantless search only when voluntary consent is given and the person giving consent should have legal rights or ability to give. For example, if the person giving consent is the owner of the private property, then the police can search the property.
If the owner of the property is not present in the situation or the owner is out of station, only then the third party can permit the police for search.
Determine what relationship must be there between third party and suspect:
The third party can permit search only when the third party is a close relation of the property owner or the suspect. If the third party who is giving consent is a neighbor of the suspect's property, then he or she cannot give search permission. It would be illegal.
Conclusion:
Warrantless search is a search process by the police in the private property of the suspect without having any warrant, but with a reasonable doubt. Third party consent is acceptable only when the property owner is a close relation of the third party.

Question 4

Does the Miranda warning impede crime prevention? Why or why not?

Question 5

How does the release of guilty offenders because of legal "technicalities" affect your view of the criminal justice system?