Case Law

A police officer ordering a person out of a vehicle during a traffic stop to conduct a pat-down search to check for weapons does not violate the Fourth Amendment if the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person might be carrying a weapon.

Automobile passengers are "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when the car in which they are riding is held at a law enforcement traffic stop. 

An officer may conduct a pat-down search of a passenger in a vehicle that has been lawfully stopped for a minor traffic violation, provided that the peace officer has reasonable suspicion that the subject is armed & dangerous. 

When a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others." 

An arresting officer may search only the area "within the immediate control" of the person arrested, meaning the area from which he might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence. Any other search of the surrounding area requires a search warrant. 

Police may stop a person if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed or is about to commit a crime, and may frisk the suspect for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the suspect is armed and dangerous, without violating the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. 

The Fourth Amendment permits the seizure of contraband detected through a police officer's sense of touch during a protective patdown search. 

Unprovoked flight or evasive behavior in a high-crime area grants enough reasonable suspicion to conduct a search under Terry vs. Ohio. 

A police officer may not legally stop and frisk anyone based solely on an anonymous tip that simply described that person's location and appearance without information as to any illegal conduct that the person might be planning. The tip most possess a moderate level of reliability.

When officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense and bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody, taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and does not require a warrant. 

Any traffic offense committed by a driver is a legitimate legal basis for a traffic stop. 

Determined the test of objective reasonableness that sets forth that judgments against an officer are to be made using the facts and information that the officer had access to at the time. 

The government's use of trained police dogs to investigate a home and its immediate surroundings is a "search" and requires probable cause. 

Peace officers do not require a search warrant to search a moveable vehicle although probable cause is required. 

The Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth, excludes unconstitutionally obtained evidence from use in criminal prosecutions. 

1. The Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination requires law enforcement officials to advise a suspect interrogated in custody of their rights to remain silent and to obtain an attorney, at no charge if need be.

2. Miranda Rights:
   “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have a right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you by the State of San Andreas. Do you understand these rights as I have read them to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak with me?”