Fourth Amendment Searches - Utah Criminal Attorney
The Fourth Amendment guarantees protection against unreasonable
warrantless
searches and seizures. If the police have
obtained
evidence in violation of the Fourth Amendment, that evidence may be
ordered suppressed by a judge. As an
experienced
Utah
criminal defense attorney, Stephen Howard can perform a case
analysis to determine whether there are viable grounds for a motion to
suppress in your case.
Contact us today to
schedule an initial consultation.
Effects of a Successful Motion to Suppress in a Utah Criminal
Case
The United States Supreme Court has determined that evidence obtained
by police actors in violation of a defendant's Fourth Amendment rights
can be ordered suppressed by the trial court. Evidence which is
suppressed is not available for use by a prosecutor at trial.
This suppression order can also extend to evidence that is considered
to be "fruit of the poisonous tree." This means that if police
initially obtain information in violation of a defendant's Fourth
Amendment rights, and then use that information to obtain additional
evidence, both the initial evidence and any evidence discovered as a
result of the initial violation can be suppressed.
Utah Search and Seizure Law - Reasonable Expectation of
Privacy
Courts
will normally grant a motion to suppress on Fourth Amendment grounds
only if a defendant can show a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in
the place, acts, or materials that are the subject of a warrantless
police search or seizure. Activities conducted in a public place or in
a public manner will not receive the same protection under the Fourth
Amendment. Consider the following examples:
A person's home
receives some of the strongest protections under the Fourth Amendment.
Because most people expect that activities in their homes are
considered private, police will normally be required to obtain a
warrant before entering or searching a person's home. Absent a warrant,
police normally cannot use listening devices ("bugs") to eavesdrop on
private conversations that occur inside a home. However, if a person
inside a home is yelling so loudly that a police officer standing on
the street can hear what is being said, then courts have determined
that the person speaking no longer has an expectation of privacy in the
conversation. Police in such a circumstance would not need a warrant.
Electronic
communications may or may not involve a reasonable expectation of
privacy, depending on the forum in which the communication occurs.
Private email communications or text messages may receive Fourth
Amendment protections, and police may not be able to obtain records of
those communications without a warrant. However, messages posted in
public social media forums that can be viewed by others do not carry
the same expectation of privacy, and may not receive the same
protections.
Exceptions to the Warrant Rule
As a general rule, the
Fourth Amendment protects people, homes, vehicles, hotel
rooms,
telephone conversations, and other actions or property where a person
has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
If the police intend to search one of these places, or
seize items from such places, a warrant will normally be required.
There are, however, a number of exceptions to the warrant requirement.
Following is a partial list of some such exceptions.
Police
are not required to obtain a warrant if they are acting in the capacity
of a public caretaker. A warrant is not required if the police can
obtain consent to search. If an item is in plain view, and it is
immediately apparent that the item is illegal contraband or other
evidence of a crime, the police may not be required to obtain a
warrant. In cases of emergency or "hot pursuit" police may not be
required to obtain a warrant. A search "incident to arrest" may also be
conducted without a warrant.
"Standing" to File a Motion to Suppress
Before a court will order evidence suppressed for a Fourth Amendment
violation, a defendant must first establish "standing" to file the
motion. In simplified terms, the defendant must establish that his or
her rights were violated and that the search or seizure involved a
place or property in which the defendant had a reasonable expectation
of privacy.
For
example, if police search a defendant's home without a warrant and find
evidence of drug distribution committed by the defendant, the defendant
will normally be considered to have "standing" to contest the search -
because he has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his own home.
However, if police search the defendant's neighbor's house and find
evidence of illegal drug activity committed by the defendant, the
defendant will likely not have "standing" to contest the search -
because he does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his
neighbor's home.
Finding a Utah Criminal Defense Attorney in Salt Lake City
The
laws surrounding Fourth Amendment search and seizure are very complex.
If you are being prosecuted for a crime in Utah and believe that your
Fourth Amendment rights have been violated, it is important to have the
assistance of an experienced
criminal defense
attorney. A
motion to
suppress may form an important part of your
defense strategy.
Salt
Lake criminal defense lawyer Stephen Howard has handled
thousands of serious Utah criminal felony and misdemeanor
charges, and has a record of achieving
real
results for his clients.
Contact us now to
schedule an appointment for an initial consultation and case analysis.