专题频道: ·房地产法· 婚姻法· 刑法· 劳动法· 合同法 ·公司法· 证券法 ·行政法· 民法· 知识产权法· 交通安全法·物权法·反垄断法

法律吧上海站


相关链接:

您现在的位置: 法律吧 >> 法律英语 >> 法律术语 >> 文章正文
 
 -法律英语导读(44)
              编缉:佚名 来源: 不详   整理:法律吧 点击数: 关闭 点击进入:法律咨询热线



法律英语导读(44)

  Section V: Warrantless Searches That Are Incident to Arrest

  This section deals with warrantless searches that are considered valid because they were made in the course of making a valid arrest.

  31. Can an Officer Legally Search Me After Arresting Me?

  Yes. Police officers do not need a warrant to make a search "incident to an arrest." After an arrest, police officers have the right to protect themselves by searching for weapons and to protect the legal case against the suspect by searching for evidence that the suspect might try to destroy. Assuming that the officer has probable cause to make the arrest in the first place, a search of the person and the person's surroundings following the arrest is valid, and any evidence uncovered is admissible at trial.

  32. If I'm Arrested on the Street or in a Shopping Mall, Can the Arresting Officer Search My Dwelling or Car?

  No. To justify a search as incident to an arrest, a spatial relationship must exist between the arrest and the search. The general rule is that after arrest the police may search a defendant and the area within a defendant's immediate control. (Chimel v. California, U.S. Sup. Ct. 1969.) For example, an arresting officer may search not only a suspect's clothes, but also a suspect's wallet or purse. If an arrest takes place in a kitchen, the arresting officer can probably search the kitchen, but not the rest of the house. If an arrest takes place outside a house, the arresting officer cannot search the house at all. To conduct a search broader in scope than a defendant and the area within the defendant's immediate control, an officer would have to obtain a warrant.

  Case Example: Officer Montoya arrests Sarah Adams for driving under the influence of illegal drugs. Before taking Sarah to jail, Officer Montoya takes Sarah's key and enters her apartment. Inside, Officer Montoya finds a number of computers that turn out—after a check of their serial numbers—to have been stolen. Officer Montoya seizes the computers as evidence and adds possession of stolen property to the charges against Sarah.

  Question: Are the computers admissible in evidence?

  Answer: No. The officer should have obtained a search warrant before entering Sarah's apartment. Since Officer Montoya had no right to be inside the house in the first place, it doesn't matter that the computers were in plain view once the officer was inside.

  Don't Go Back in the House

  When the police arrest suspects outside their residences and have no basis for making a protective sweep, officers may try to expand the scope of a permissible search by offering to let suspects go inside to get a change of clothes, feed a pet, etc. before taking the suspect to jail. While accompanying the suspect inside the residence, officers can seize whatever may be in plain view (for instance, drugs). Thus, suspects may wisely refuse an invitation by the arresting officers to let the suspect enter the residence, and instead rely on their friends if they need clothes or pet feeding.

  翻译句子:
  1、To justify a search as incident to an arrest, a spatial relationship must exist between the arrest and the search
  2、a protective sweep
  3、Thus, suspects may wisely refuse an invitation by the arresting officers to let the suspect enter the residence, and instead rely on their friends if they need clothes or pet feeding.

  答案:
  1、为证明逮捕后附带搜查的正当合法,逮捕和搜查之间必须存在空间上的联系。
  2、保护性搜查
  3、因此,嫌疑犯最好理智地拒绝警官请自己回屋的好意,而是请朋友帮忙拿自己的衣服或代养宠物。


                                                                【字体: 】 【打印】 【关闭
  • 上一篇文章:

  • 下一篇文章:


  • 社会热点:
     

    声明:本站所有文章来自网上,仅供网友和法律研究学者交流和学习之用,不以任何商业为目的,如有侵权请告知本站.
    Copyright © 2004-2020 WWW.falvba.net. All rights Reserved. 法律吧 版权所有
    信息产业部备案号:沪ICP备05062559号