Search and Seizures

            I disagree with the court’s ruling. This is because cell phones are the most used devices in planning and organizing crimes. Evidence collected from the devices may thus be useful for prosecution or in supporting the presented case despite this being a personalized search.

            An inventory search can be described as a regular inventory of a vehicle that is impounded. According to the ruling of the Supreme Court evidence that is established during an inventory search can be utilized in prosecution (Emanuel, 2007). During an inventory search, no warrant is necessitated because the state impounds a vehicle legally thus bearing the legal liability related to the vehicle. This is similar to a vehicle search which only requires a reasonable cause and no warrant is necessary. Therefore in order for the state to fully protect itself from the lawsuit, it is required to hold written documents of all the contents. This is a  plain doctrine view as the police  officers who conduct the  inventory search holds  a reason that is legitimate to view what is inside the car and therefore it cannot be  reasonable for them to conduct the search while their eyes remain closed. In the inventory search evidence establishment is not the main purpose of the search and the search must, therefore, observe all the policies and fully satisfy the provided objectives. The search must not, therefore, be utilized as a general rule rummaging in the quest for discovering evidence that is incriminating (Emanuel, 2007).

            On the other hand vehicle searches are a United States legal rule that permits motor vehicle search without the provision of a search warrant which is normally necessitated by the fourth amendment of the United States constitution.  This search, therefore, permits a police officer to search a vehicle without having a warrant as long as there is a probable cause which can help in believing that evidence is situated in the vehicle (Emanuel, 2007).  The major difference between inventory search despite them being similar in not requiring a warrant is the fact that vehicle search aims at establishing evidence while inventory search is not based on evidence as its main purpose.

            The law enforcement officers should be allowed to conduct an inventory search because it is not aimed at incriminating an individual but to establish a clause. This, therefore, helps in protecting individuals from harmful objects which may thus be held due to upheld privacy. Additionally, a warrant is not necessary because it is not purposed to establish any form of evidence.

 

 

References

            David J. Robinson. (2014).Criminal law. The U.S Supreme Court says No to Cell Phone Searches Incident to Arrest. Retrieved from https://www.isba.org/ibj/2014/09/ussupremecourtsays%e2%80%98no%e2%80%99cell-phonesea

            Emanuel, S. (2007). Criminal procedure. Austin: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business/Aspen Publishers.