My current location: San Jose, CA | Change location
Featured Legal Services
Law Office of Donald M. Kelly Affordable, Experienced, Aggressive Trial Attorney. Free Consultation.
(408) 298-2800

Understanding Search and Seizure Law


Courts use a two-part test (fashioned by the U.S. Supreme Court) to determine whether, at the time of the search, a defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place or things searched:

  • Did the person actually expect some degree of privacy?
  • Is the person's expectation objectively reasonable -- that is, one that society is willing to recognize?

For example, a person who uses a public restroom expects not to be spied upon (the person has an expectation of privacy) and most people -- including judges and juries -- would consider that expectation to be reasonable (there is an objective expectation of privacy as well). Therefore, the installation of a hidden video camera by the police in a public restroom will be considered a "search" and would be subject to the Fourth Amendment's requirement of reasonableness.

On the other hand, when the police look for and find a weapon on the front seat of a car, it is not considered a search under the Fourth Amendment because it is very unlikely that the person would think that the front seat of the car is a private place (an expectation of privacy is unlikely), and even if the person did, society is not willing to extend the protections of privacy to that particular location (no objective expectation of privacy).

A good example of how this works comes from a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court held that a bus passenger had a legitimate expectation of privacy in an opaque carry-on bag positioned in a luggage rack above the passenger's head, and that the physical probing by the police of the bag's exterior for evidence of contraband constituted a search subject to Fourth Amendment limitations. (Bond v. U.S., No. 98-9349 (April 17, 2000).)

 
Restrictions on Private Security Personnel

Private security personnel currently outnumber police officers in the United States by three to one. As a result, whether you're shopping in a supermarket or a pharmacy, working in an office building, or visiting a friend in a housing project, you may be more likely to be confronted by a security guard than by a police officer. At the present time, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to searches carried out by non-governmental employees like private security guards.

For example, assume that a shopping mall security guard acting on a pure hunch searches a teenager's backpack. Inside the backpack the guard finds a baggie containing an illegal drug. The guard can detain the teenager, call the police, and turn the drug over to a police officer. The drug is admissible in evidence, because the search was conducted by a private security guard. As private security guards increasingly exercise traditional police functions, courts may one day apply Fourth Amendment guidelines to their conduct.

Copyright 2007 Nolo

Featured Legal Services
Hinkle, Jachimowicz, Pointer & Emanuel A Highly Experienced Team of Attorneys Who Have Represented Clients For Over 30 Years.
(408) 217-0356
Law Offices of William Chestnut Don't Gamble With Your Freedom--30 Years of Criminal Defense Experience.
(408) 298-6990
Moore Law Firm Aggressive Representation / 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
(408) 916-1406
Sponsored Services
Find Top Criminal Lawyers Near You
A better way to find your attorney. Fast, free & easy.
More Sponsored Services
Wills, Divorce, Incorporation & More - Legalzoom:
Fast and friendly legal document service from LegalZoom, the #1 online legal document service
USLegalForms.com - Largest Selection of Legal Forms on The Internet:
Download more than 50,000 state-specific legal forms. Real estate documents, power of attorney forms, wills, employment contracts, divorce and separation agreements and much more.
Ask A Lawyer Online Now - JustAnswer.com
A Lawyer Will Answer You ASAP. Anytime, Any Day of the Week.