Legal Justifications for Search and Seizure

Legal Justifications for Search and Seizure

Exclusion of Physical Evidence

William's lawyer can ask to get the physical evidence excluded by bringing up the fourth amendment of the constitution of the United States. This prohibits the police to refrain from unreasonable search and seizure. This means that the police in the country do not have any right to search for the evidence in the room of Clyde Stevens. This law does not permit the police to investigate in the room of the William. According to this law, the police should have a search warrant or should have reasons to search the room of William. The fourteenth amendment to the constitution ensures that the police should have strong grounds to search for proper evidence. In this case, the police do not have the right to search the room for evidence (McCrackin, 1985). According to the law, the police should have proper rights and should have the permission of one of the partners who are sharing the room. Mrs. Stevens authorized the police to search her house for any evidence; this does not mean that the police have the right to search William's room for any evidence.

The police have violated the privacy of William, which means that the evidence that the police has collected is not acceptable in any manner. This is the basis on which, William's lawyer can argue to exclude the physical evidence. By excluding the evidence, the police will have to carry out the investigation again and until then William cannot be treated as a criminal. The police do not have proper evidence to prove that William is a criminal and he has murdered Mr. Stevens. By excluding the physical evidence, the case will take a unique turn and the investigation will have to be carried out in a more proper manner.

Exclusion of Evidence from the home of Ellis and Stevens

Exclusion will only pertain to the evidence collected from Ellis' home because Mrs. Stevens has given the right to search her house for any evidence. The police do not have any proper evidence that the person who has been killed was killed by William. The evidence collected at the Stevens homes proves that Mr. Stevens has been killed. This was quite evident from the evidence that was collected. According to the law, it was proved that the Mr. Stevens was dead, because a butcher knife was found protruding from his back. This proved that Mr. Stevens was killed.

The evidence collected from both the homes, does not call for exclusion (Hurley, 2003). This means that the evidence collected from Ellis' home calls for exclusion, and according to law, it should be excluded. The evidence is not based on proper investigation grounds, which means that the person who is involved in this is not been investigated on legal basis. This shows that the person who was involved in the crime is not been arrested on proper basis. This is the basis on which evidence should be excluded ...