Dakota Bailey

Period A4
11/13/2014
Amendment Issues Essay
Fourth Amendment (Search Warrant) Argument
If there does a police officer that wants' to search a specified place for
evidence even without the occupant's consent. You must know how the
search warrants works and when is needed. Knowing the origin of 4th
Amendment will give you a better understanding of living in the United
States of America. It's the entire internet now these days of some type of
government or law enforcement violating citizen's rights of this country with
an absent search warrant. But there are some exceptions of not needing a
search warrant, which will be explained in the beginning of the argument.
But I will have one situation of troubles of when there's no search warrant
used. And then the last one will be a situation when a search warrant is not
needed based on from an emergency. I will be trying to convince you that a
violation to the 4th Amendment (Search Warrants) is a problematic thing to
the citizens of the United States.

In the United States, we have so much opportunity and laws that will
protect us. But with laws, there are sometimes bring up some problems on

the way based on the people that are involved in it. (Citizens of the United
States) To make sure you understand what I'm talking about the 4th
Amendment, here is the quote from the Constitution.
"The right of the people to be in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no
warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized."
If you're the suspect about to be searched for unreasonable searches and
seizures by law enforcement, government official, etc. They must have a
search warrant and they will not violate that. The search warrant must be
approved and signed by a court judge. But, upon probable cause, meaning if
there was a murder, emergency, etc. Happened at the location, the Search
warrant is not needed and the law enforcement, government, etc. Then they
may continue on with their case of search and seized person or things.

YONKERS, N.Y. 2014

First case, Two Yonkers Police men (In New York) were suspended without
pay and could face disciplinary action after falsifying a search warrant for a
drug suspect who fell 30 feet at the apartment at 141 School St. The cops
plead not guilty in the warrant case. Their names are Neil Vera and Christian

1.

Koch. They made a drug suspected target and made a false statements in
order to secure a search warrant.

This was announced on CBS (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/08/2yonkers-officers-accused-of-fabricating-information-for-search-warrant/) and

posted on (http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2014/10/08/yonkerscops-indicted-bad-search-warrant-case/16905041/), with a video of an
interview with Neil Vera lawyer.
Neil
Vera

Christian Koch

Neal lawyer was being interviewed outside of the

Westchester Country County Courthouse. What was
reported was that nearly three dozen of other Yonkers
Police Officers went to support their indicted brother officers.
Supporters said the officers were heroes and not
criminals at all. Theyre had thousands of arrests I mean literally,
thousands of arrests; hundreds of awards, said Yonkers Police Benevolent
Association President Keith Olson. I mean, theyre the best we have to offer,
and they deserve the benefit of a doubt. After that Vera was accused of
getting a witness to lie to internal affairs investigators in May. Of Cocaine
being purchase at Tena's Building before March 21 to support the search
warrant.

2.

The judge issued a search warrant, But Koch, with fellow narcotics
detectives and anti-crime officers went to the apartment that night to carry
on their plan. Tena then went out the window after they arrived to his
apartment. He fell more than 30 feet to his death into the rear courtyard.
After this false warrant being made, 16 other different drug suspects have
been dropped from falsified paper work. Both police officers face four years
in prison of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath or
affirmation. (Perjury) Koch is a 13- year veteran of the department and Vera
is a 7-year veteran.

This is a major problem, where there can even be law enforcement that
will lie and make false excuses to have a search warrant. In this completely
irresponsible act had got a man with a suspicion of drugs killed. With
evidence of these men (Vera) having a witness lie to internal affairs
investigators of false drugs being purchased at Tena Apartment. The death
of Tena, there was 16 other drug suspects that were dropped. This has gone
so far, that the police made a falsifying search warrant. This is something
that challenges the 4th Amendment of even law enforcement who enforces
these laws, to lie and for it to support their drug suspect arrest.

Riley v. California

3.

Argued April 29, 2014 - Decided June 25, 2014

David Leon Riley was arrested on August 22, 2009, for a traffic violation.
Then there was discovery of loaded firearms in the car. The Police then
seized Riley's phone and searched through his messages, contacts, videos
and photographs. With this phone a street gang was repeated and involved.
Two hours later at the police station a detective examined the phone digital
contents. Based on the videos and photographs that were found, there was
a connection with a shooting that occurred a few weeks earlier. Then all
evidence were used against Riley based on his phone that was seized. Riley
wanted to suppress all evidence, meaning to forcibly put an end to. Later
Supreme Court announced him guilty. Now with the opinion of the court by
Chief Justice John Roberts, gave his opinion that a warrant is required to
search a mobile phone. But, "A digital data stored on a cell phone cannot
itself be used as a weapon to harm an arresting officer or to effectuate the
arrestee's escape." This allows law enforcement officers free to examine
physical aspects of a phone to ensure that it will not be used as a weapon.
Like if there's a razor blade hidden between the phone and its case. That's
what they thought for an example. Once the phone is clear, data on the
phone can endanger no one. But at the end it was said that the fourth, fifth,
and seventh circuits had ruled that officers can search cell phones to arrest
under various standards.

4.

But if you forget, arm weaponry was found in the car, making the
search warrants not needed anymore. Having David Leon Riley sentenced
guilty; the problem is that the law enforcement is able to search through
your cell phone warrantless. Supreme Court to rule on cell phone privacy.
(Jan. 17, 2014) This was at first of a thought of a violation of the 4th
amendment but then was put away from the other founding in the car. It
was at first an arrest of a traffic violation, then possession of arm weaponry
and having evidence from Riley seized phone with data of a gang related
shoot out at which happened few weeks ago. David Leon Riley was guilty on
all charges. But one last thing to bring this case to light that there was an
announcement to the public on CBS, on June 25, 2014, 11:00 AM "Supreme
Court limits cell phone searches after arrests"
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-limits-cell-phone-searchesafter-arrests/ In this that police officers cannot search your phones, but only
if there was an emergency of a bomb or kidnapping. Then they can take and
search your phone. Then David Riley argument of suppressing all evidence,
the law still charges him guilty with all the evidence on his phone.

There is an exception of the 4th amendment, that search warrants are

not needed in case of an emergency. The two Yonkers police officers Neil and
Kristen lied for a search warrant. It got a citizen (Tena) killed from there
misleading act. The people who made an oath of enforcing the law, to go

5.

behind law enforcement back and made this terrible incident. They violated
the 4th amendment of making false paperwork. Both police officers face
four years in prison of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken
an oath or affirmation. (Riley v. California) David Leon Riley was being
arrested for traffic violation and then found arm weapons in his car. But once
when they took his phone, there were evidence of pictures and videos of a
gang shooting that happened not so long time ago. David wanted the
evidence to be dropped since they didn't have a warrant to search his phone.
But, they were able to do that since he was being arrested for traffic violation
and arm weapons were seen in the car. But this year it's been announced
that police officers can't take your phone in case of an emergency. But,
when this happens, they can even go through your phone without a search
warrant. Making in invasion of privacy and bring more understood problems
towards the citizens. These violations of the 4th amendment law
enforcement can risk citizen's lives. And privacy being invaded through your
own phone can cause lots of problems too. Violation to the 4th Amendment
can take a life and invade citizen's privacy. This is a problematic thing when
people can abuse this law and make problems when people lose some of
their rights through some exception to allow law enforcement to invade your
privacy. There are many more cases like these two who changed citizen's
lives and I hoped you understand of what's in stake of your rights of being in
the United States of America.

6.

Resources
Defining Search Warrants and more requirements
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/search_warrant
4th amendment quote
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

7.

Violations of Warrant Requirements

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/violations-ofwarrant-requirements.html
News report of the Yonkers case commissioner interview -Longer
Filmhttp://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2014/10/08/yonkers-copsindicted-bad-search-warrant-case/1690504/
CBS New York (Lou Young) report lawyer representing Vera
interview -Short Filmhttp://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/08/2-yonkers-officersaccused-of-fabricating-information-for-search-warrant/
Riley California Case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-132_8l9c.pdf
Supreme Court rule on Cell Phone Privacy
https://epic.org/amicus/cell-phone/riley/