In appendix B, The Rules of Law Enforcement, there are several instances that should be addressed. We can start with the search and seizure of the suspect’s residence. The police did not conduct a lawful search and seizure under the guidelines described in the 4th Amendment. The police would have to obtain a search warrant before entering and searching the residence. There wasn’t reason for the police to enter the suspect’s residence. The fact that the officers had an arrest warrant for the suspect is not an exigent circumstance that would have allowed the police to enter his residence. If the police had entered the residence under exigent circumstance and had seen any evidence in plain view then it could have been a lawful search and seizure. Finding evidence in plain view would have been the probable cause needed to search the entire residence for evidence after obtaining a search warrant. This was not a reasonable search and there was no probable cause that would have allowed the search. The evidence in the case study that led to this conclusion was it states that the police entered the residence with only an arrest warrant and the nod of a 14-year-old girl. It does not state that the officers had a search warrant. According to the way this search was conducted, the suspect 4th Amendment was violated.
The fact that the police had obtained an arrest warrant for the suspect and took him into custody when he arrived home was the part of the arrest that was conducted properly. When the police entered the home of the suspect without permission or a search warrant was the part of the arrest that was conducted in an improper manner.
Miranda rights were read to the first suspect at the correct time. The 2nd suspect doesn’t appear to have been read his Miranda rights. This was not done correctly. If the police are going to question a suspect to gather evidence about the