As an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, discuss your opinion for the Court based on the following facts: James Smith was arrested for burglarizing his next door neighbor's apartment in the state of California. And without the benefit of a warrant, the neighbor, who is a friend of Mr. Smith, forced open the front door to Mr. Smith's apartment and saw his property. The neighbor called the police, and they immediately arrested Mr. Smith for burglary and possession of stolen property out of fear that he would get rid of the property before they returned with a search warrant. Mr. Smith's conviction in the state and federal courts were upheld, and it is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. Prepare the Court's response to this constitutional challenge that Mr. Smith was denied equal protection under the law. Identify specific examples in the language of prior decisions.Examine some of the arguments used by the framers of the Constitution while debating the language of the document. Include any philosophical underpinning that might influence the court's ruling.Include any social force(s) that could be useful to guide the decision.Outline major philosophical arguments of the U.S. Supreme Court in such cases as Weeks v. United States (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=232&invol=383) and Mapp v. Ohio (http://supreme.justia.com/us/367/643/case.html).Please note that the U.S. Bill of Rights brings a philosophical perspective that should not be lost and has helped to shape constitutional law in the United States.
The case relating to Mr. Smith happened in the state of California. Now the Supreme Court of California has ruled in the case People v. Cahan (1955) that the exclusionary rule applied for cases in the state of California. So, in case of Mr. Smith, the exclusionary rule applies.
Even though the friend of Mr. Smith forced open the front door to Mr. Smith's apartment, it was the police that illegally entered his house, arrested him, seized stolen property and presented the stolen property as evidence in the court of law. In Weeks v. United States police entered the home of Fremont Weeks and seized papers which were used to convict him. This was done without a search warrant. Similarly, the police entered Smith's apartment without search warrant, seized stolen goods and produced them as evidence in court. The ...
U.S. Bill of Rights is discussed in great detail in this solution.