NCJ Number
145365
Journal
Louisiana Law Review Volume: 52 Issue: 5 Dated: (May 1992) Pages: 1205-1266
Date Published
1992
Length
62 pages
Annotation
The author comments that the US Supreme Court decision in California v. Acevedo cannot be reconciled with the fourth amendment; further, that this indicates a disturbing trend.
Abstract
A balance must be struck between individual liberty and social law and order. The current Supreme Court, through Acevedo and other cases, has shown a sense of balance that tilts toward state control, representing a departure from a major founding principle of this country: that individual liberty is paramount. The fourth amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures against their persons, houses, papers, and effects. How this applies in cases of automobile searches has been a modern dilemma. The first such case was heard during the Prohibition era; the Court made a distinction between an automobile and a private dwelling, but reasonable suspicion was still required for a warrantless search. In Acevedo, the item at issue was a lunchbag. The decision was motivated by the need to make apprehension of offenders easier. However, police empowerment to the detriment of individual liberty is dangerous in the long run. 262 footnotes