Chapters 5 and 6 explored the 4th Amendment subjects of arrests and searches both with and without warrants. With these course readings in mind consider and respond to the following questions:
In Atwater, the Supreme Court held that the 4th Amendment does not prohibit law enforcement from conducting full custodial arrests for minor criminal offenses which, at a maximum, can only be punished by a fine. Do you agree with this opinion? Why or why not?
What was the rationale given by the Supreme Court in Chimel for permitting searches without a warrant when they are made incident to arrest? Also, given the rationale of the Court in Chimel for this warrant exception, how do you think arrests of occupants of cars should be treated?
One of the numerous exceptions to the warrant requirement is “consent.” Read U.S. v Matlock at: UNITED STATES v. MATLOCK, 415 U.S. 164 (1974). How do you personally feel about the lawfulness of third party consent searches? Do you think it is appropriate, under the rule of joint authority, for another person to be permitted to give consent for you?
Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision in Illinois v. Rodriguez? Do you think it was correctly decided? Why or why not?