Government interests are greater than the need to keep certain information private
To protect its citizens from terrorist attacks
Government interests are greater than the need to keep certain information private.
Warrantless searches can be performed when consent is given or there are exigent circumstances. An exigent circumstance is if the police feel that someone's safety is at risk or criminal activity is ongoing. Two other conditions are the plain view doctrine and incidental searches.
United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that upheld the warrantless searches of an automobile, which is known as the automobile exception. The case has also been cited as widening the scope of warrantless search.
the 1978 supreme court case that related to the impropriety of the warrantless collection of physical evidence at a homicide scene is ?
Miranda v. Arizona
true
The Supreme Court created an exception to the exclusionary rule for searches conducted by school administrators.
The Supreme Court held in Terry v. Ohio (1968) that police officers, based on their street experience but not necessarily probable cause, may stop suspects and pat them down to look for weapons. The Court expanded this category of warrantless searches and seizures in Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993), ruling that a police officer may seize contraband, not just weapons, during a "pat down." However, such contraband must be obvious through the defendant's clothing. Source: The Words We Live By...Linda Monk...2003
illegal searches
In the Rochin v. California case, the supreme court ruled that the suspect could not be tried because some of the searches were shocking to the conscience and that the fruits of such searches should be excluded from the courts.
Yes, it is true that the US Supreme Court has consistently expressed a strong preference for the use of search warrants. This preference is based on the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Court has held that a warrant is generally required for searches and seizures, except for certain exceptions recognized by the Court.