Week five assignment
2
Legal Issue #1: Did the special agents have the authority to conduct a search of the house?
References:
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980)
United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38 (1976)
Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969)
Analysis:
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures and requires that search warrants be supported by probable cause. In this scenario, the special agents obtained a search warrant for the crack house based on the tip provided by a reliable source. The warrant listed the address and specified the items to be searched for. As a result, the agents had legal authority to conduct a search of the premises.
Additionally, when the two males entered the house carrying a small package, there was
reasonable suspicion to believe that illegal activity was taking place, justifying a limited investigative detention. The agents waited for an hour, allowing time for the suspects to
get comfortable enough to begin cutting the cocaine before executing the raid. The actions of the agents align with the principles established in Terry v. Ohio, which allow for limited stops and searches based on reasonable suspicion.
They conducted the entry into the house and the subsequent search under the Fourth Amendment and established legal principles. Therefore, the special agents had the authority to conduct the search.
