Essay On Search Incident To Arrest

Search Incident to Arrest

One exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment is a search incident to a lawful arrest. A search incident to lawful arrest requires a valid arrest as a foundation for conducting a search following an arrest (Ingram, 2009). In this particular type of arrest, a police officer will first begin the process by obtaining full control over an individual. Once the officer obtains full control over the individual he or she will then determine where, when, and how the person will either move from or stay in a particular area (Ingram, 2009). The next move is for the officer, after detaining the individual in question, is to then search the individual to find incriminating evidence. It is important to note that this type of search is actually permitted under the law.

The law also states that the officer can not only search the individual, but he or she can also search the area

within the immediate domain and control of the arrested individual. However, the officer is only permitted to search just that, any more would be a violation of the law. Once the officer has obtained any evidence, the law permits that the officer can then seize the evidence of criminality. The reason this is permitted is because the individual could destroy the evidence against them or conceal it in an attempt to avoid criminal charges.
This type of exception to the requirement of the search warrant is based on two rationales.

The first being that law enforcement officials need to disarm their suspect before they take him or her into custody. The second rationale is to allow for the preservation of evidence in order to obtain evidence of criminality, and for said evidence to be used in a trial at a later date. One particular case in which this law was tested was in the case of Knowles v. Iowa (1998). In this particular case, a police officer searched a vehicle without first arresting the driver, but the officer did have probable cause. Even though the officer had probable cause to search the vehicle, the court concluded that such a search was a violation of the law. The court went on to say that the search was not permitted because no arrest had been made and therefore, the search of the vehicle could not be justified. The requirement of the law is that a search incident to arrest must first begin with an officer making an arrest prior to conducting a search incident to arrest (Ingram,

2009).
Search Incident to Arrest: No warrant Requirement
The procedure of a search incident to a lawful arrest has been permitted as an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement since 1914. The actions permitted under this exception were expanded in the case of Marron v. United States (1927). In this particular case, the court decided that a search incident to arrest gives police the authority to search all parts of the premises that the suspect used for unlawful purposes (Ingram, 2009). The police could also seize the evidence that they obtained from their search to be used later in the trial. In 1950, the courts made yet another addition to this law. This addition was originated in the case of United States v. Rabinowitz (1950). In this case, the defendant Rabinowitz had been inside of his place of business at the time of his arrest; therefore, the police searched Rabinowitz as well as his entire business. The court concluded that such a search was permitted because the police are permitted to search the entire premises that the suspect occupied at the time of their arrest (Ingram, 2009).