Timeline of Landmark Cases Shaping Law Enforcement Searches and Seizures.For your Midterm Project, you’ll need to create a timeline of 6 major cases that changed the way law enforcement conducts searches and seizures.

QUESTION

For your Midterm Project, you’ll need to create a timeline of 6 major cases that changed the way law enforcement conducts searches and seizures. The timeline should range at least 50 years, and be saved in Microsoft Word format.

The timeline should include 1-2 paragraph summaries of each case. All sources must be properly cited in APA style.

ANSWER

Timeline of Landmark Cases Shaping Law Enforcement Searches and Seizures

1961 – Mapp v. Ohio

The Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained through illegal searches and seizures by state law enforcement officials is inadmissible in court.
Established the “exclusionary rule” at the state level, providing greater protection to individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures.

1966 – Miranda v. Arizona

The Supreme Court held that individuals in custody must be informed of their rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.
Led to the creation of the “Miranda warning” to ensure suspects are aware of their constitutional rights during police interrogations.

1984 – United States v. Leon

The Supreme Court introduced the “good faith exception” to the exclusionary rule.
Stated that evidence obtained through a search that was later found to be invalid may still be admissible if law enforcement officers reasonably believed the search was legal.

1996 – Whren v. United States

The Supreme Court upheld the legality of traffic stops based on pretextual reasons, even if the true motive was unrelated to traffic violations.
Allowed law enforcement to use minor traffic violations as a pretext to investigate other potential criminal activities.

2009 – Arizona v. Gant

The Supreme Court limited the authority of law enforcement to search a vehicle incident to arrest.
Ruled that police can only search a vehicle without a warrant after arresting the occupant if there is a reasonable belief that evidence of the offense of arrest may be found inside the vehicle.

2018 – Carpenter v. United States

The Supreme Court recognized the Fourth Amendment protection for historical cell phone location data.
Decided that law enforcement agencies must obtain a warrant to access cell phone location records, acknowledging the privacy implications of digital technology.

Conclusion

These landmark cases have played a crucial role in shaping law enforcement practices regarding searches and seizures. From establishing the exclusionary rule and Miranda rights to introducing exceptions and defining the scope of permissible searches, these cases have influenced the balance between law enforcement authority and individuals’ constitutional rights. As technology continues to evolve, future cases may further shape how law enforcement conducts searches and seizures, ensuring a delicate balance between public safety and individual privacy.