The Fourth Amendment guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures is not clearly defined. Nowhere in the text did the framers explain what exactly constitutes a “search” or “seizure”–or even what makes such a search and seizure “unreasonable.” Over the years, the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts have filled in the blanks and ascribed meaning to these terms, including when police actions do and do not violate the amendment’s warrant requirement. For example, given the exigent circumstances, it is often not unreasonable to conduct a warrantless search of a person’s car.
While the framers could not conceivably contemplate how the Fourth Amendment would work in 21st century United States, it is clear that they were wary of unlimited government power. Given that historical context, would the framers consider it reasonable for undercover federal agents to conduct a warrantless covert search under less-than-honest circumstances?
Federal Agents Pose as Internet Technicians
Consider the facts of an actual case working its way through the federal court system: The defendants are Chinese high-rolling gamblers who were staying at Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas. The Nevada Gaming Commission and the FBI were suspicious of these men because one had already been kicked out of Macau (which, like Hong Kong, is under Chinese control) for running an illegal sports-booking operation. FBI agents wanted to investigate their suspicions, but they did not have the necessary probable cause to secure a search warrant. So they decided to proceed without a search warrant.
Posing as Internet technicians, the agents gained access to the gamblers’ villa by promising to fix the Internet service–after having cut the line themselves. (The agents admitted to doing this on an audio recording made during the search.) Once inside, the agents explored the premises, covertly taking photographs. They determined that there was enough evidence to obtain a search warrant. Now, however, the gamblers are arguing that the evidence is the fruit of an unlawful search. If the government is allowed to obtain evidence in this way, what is to stop them from cutting your cable, water or phone lines–all so that they can masquerade as repairmen and covertly search your home?
This case has not yet been resolved.
Searches Conducted in Your Home
Generally, the police may not conduct a warrantless search of your home without your consent. Here are a few things to keep in mind if an officer knocks on your door and asks to come in:
- If the officer does not have a warrant, you have the right to refuse him entry;
- If there is contraband in plain view (e.g., you let the officer into your living room and there is cocaine on the coffee table) then the law allows him to seize that contraband; and
- If the officer holds a warrant, it must describe with particularity the places to be searched and the items to be seized.
Evidence obtained illegally cannot be used against you in a court of law. Our criminal defense attorneys in Schaumburg have experience protecting defendants from such Fourth Amendment violations. Contact us today for a consultation. We can assist those in Chicago and the surrounding suburban areas.