The Fourth Amendment states that: The right of the people to be secure 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 (Kaci 221). The Fourth Amendment can be broken down into three sections, first is to provide protection for a person, his home and belongings, second, to prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures, and thirdly, warrants must be based on probably cause and specifically described as to what must be seized.

The Fourth Amendment applies to a search only if a person has a "legitimate expectation of privacy" in the place or thing sea

rched. If not, the Fourth Amendment offers no protection because there are, by definition, no privacy issues (Nolo 2). To satisfy this guideline, the Court has to ask three questions. The first question is if the person expected some degree of privacy and the second is if that expectation is reasonable. If these two questions are answered yes, then the last question to be answered is if the search was reasonable or unreasonable.

Acting on information indicating that respondent Greenwood might be engaged in narcotics trafficking, police twice obtained from his regular trash collector garbage bags left on the curb in front of his house. On the basis of items in the bags, which were indicative of narcotics use, the police obtained warrant searching the house, discovered controlled substances during the searches, and arrested respondents on felony narcotics charges. Finding that probably cause to search the house would not have existed the evidence obtained from the trash searches, the State Superior Court dismissed the charges un People V. Krivda, 5 Cal.3d 357, 486 P.2nd 1262, which held that warrant less trash searches violate the Fourth Amendment and the California Constitution. Although nothing a post-Krivda was based on federal, as well as state, law (Cornell 1). The case of California vs. Greenwood was reversed and remanded again and was found that the Fourth Amendment does not include garbage left for collection as a violation of privacy since the person that is leaving the garbage knows that it is not in their custody.

The Santa Clara, Cal., police received an anonymous telephone tip that marijuana was growing in respondent's backyard, which was enclosed by two fences and shielded from view at ground level. Officers who are trained in marijuana identification secured a

Some common words found in the essay are:
Fourth Amendment, Clara Cal, San Diego, Supreme Court, Administration DEA, California Constitution, People Krivda, fourth amendment, Ciraolo California, Superior Court, motor home, california vs, unreasonable searches seizures, searches seizures, unreasonable searches, search warrant, Court Appeal, probably cause, trash searches, supreme court, vs ciraolo california, police officer, ciraolo california vs, california vs ciraolo, california vs carney,
Approximate Word count = 1207
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)