For the anonymous
tip to be valid, it imperative that it meets the Aguilar-Spinelli test,
encompasses the assessment of the underlying circumstances that the individuals
relied on to as well as the issues that led to the informant concluding a crime
had occurred (Kerr, 2013). The fact that these issues were not addressed before
Officer Jones went to the citizen’s house implies that his actions were not
valid.
His
actions are against the constitution as they go against the fourth amendment
which protects citizens from apprehension by the law enforcement officers as
well as searches of places and items the individual has a legitimate
expectation of privacy (Kerr, 2013).
By
looking at the elements that make up the probable cause, it clear that some the
actions undertaken by Officer Jones can be reviewed in the manner in which they
satisfy the elements. The first issue is the fact that Officer Jones did not
have specific knowledge of the facts and circumstances of the offense which
makes his action unjustified. Secondly, there was no basis to authenticating
the tip from the anonymous informant as there was no follow-up on the issue.
The third element entails corroboration of the information; it becomes evident
that the actions he took were not justified (Bowers, 2014).
References
Bowers, J. (2014).
Probable Cause, Constitutional Reasonableness and the Unrecognized Point of a'Pointless Indignity'.
Kerr, O. S. (2013). The
Curious History of Fourth Amendment Searches. The Supreme Court Review, 2012(1),
67-97.
Carolyn Morgan is the author of this paper. A senior editor at MeldaResearch.Com in custom research paper services. If you need a similar paper you can place your order from urgent essay writing service.
No comments:
Post a Comment