The U.S. Fourth Amendment is what comes to mind when you think about public protection from law enforcement intrusion. However, if you reside in or have been charged with a crime there, federal law is not the only statute that provides search-and-seizure protections. The protections are also guaranteed under California law. If you have undergone an unreasonable search and seizure, you and your criminal defense attorney can petition the court to exclude the illegally acquired evidence from the unreasonable search through a motion to suppress.

An experienced attorney will evaluate the circumstances in your case to determine whether there is proof of an illegal search. Additionally, the attorney will discuss the reasonable expectation of privacy, search warrants, exceptions, and the exclusionary rule to help you understand your rights against police intrusion.

The Reasonable Expectation of Privacy

The search and seizure protection laws in California are:

  • The Fourth Amendment

  • California Article 1, Sec. 13

As per these sections of the federal and state constitutions, you have a right to protection from illegal search and seizure, which happens when authorities search without a judge-issued warrant or probable cause. A police officer's reasonable suspicion that you are committing a crime is not enough to justify an arrest or search. They require a valid search warrant, a valid and lawful arrest warrant, and probable cause that you have committed a crime to search and seize your car or property. If the police intrude on these rights, your attorney can present evidence to prove the arrest was illegal, making the evidence presented by the prosecutor inadmissible.

However, before the judge grants your motion to suppress evidence or makes the evidence inadmissible, you, with the help of your defense attorney, must demonstrate that law enforcement officers intruded on your privacy.

Under California law, a reasonable expectation of privacy can be objective or subjective. In subjective expectation, you must demonstrate to the judge that you actually believed your actions or property were private. Conversely, objective reasonableness is a belief that the court is willing to deem as reasonable. It means that you enjoy protection from searches the court deems as unreasonable and seizures of property where you have an actual or reasonable privacy interest.

The interpretation of the reasonable expectation of privacy under federal law differs from that under state law. You may have a subjective expectation that a certain property is protected, but under the federal statutes, the protection does not exist. For instance, in the case of Katz vs. the US government, the Supreme Court ruled that garbage left at the curb was abandoned and therefore the defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy. However, in a similar case between the People and Krivda, California courts ruled that Californians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their garbage until it is discarded, ending the privacy.

So, in a federal court, the police can use evidence acquired from your trash in the trial. However, in California, evidence obtained from your trash without a valid warrant or probable cause is inadmissible, as society generally considers your garbage private property until it is discarded.

The properties you reasonably expect privacy and protection from unreasonable search are:

  • Your home

  • Your phone, cell phone, computer, or any other electronic storage device

  • Your hotel room

  • Personal property that public school students carry to school

  • Your tent

However, places you should not expect reasonable privacy based on court rulings include:

  • The immediate area surrounding your home or property

  • Contents of a stolen car

  • Abandoned property

  • Contraband in plain view of law enforcement

  • Property inside a car

  • Bank records

  • Conversations held in public spaces, like a street corner

The police can take contraband into evidence that is in plain view without requesting a search warrant. Additionally, any records in the custody of a third party, including bank records, are not protected by federal privacy law. Also, if you abandon your property today, then you cannot reasonably expect privacy. Furthermore, any property in a vehicle that you do not own or have an ownership interest in is not private and does not enjoy protection.

Even if you reasonably expect privacy in a property, it does not bar the police from searching it if they have a valid search warrant or if one of its conditions applies in your case.

Search Warrants

Any search and seizure conducted without a valid search warrant is considered unreasonable. A federal or state judge can issue a warrant authorizing police to search an individual, their residence, car, business premises, or other specified locations that may contain evidence of a violation. Judges are the only parties allowed to issue warrants because they are considered neutral, unlike law enforcement or prosecutors, who might be attached to the investigation.

Before issuing the warrant, the judge must establish that a misdemeanor or felony violation has occurred and that evidence of the crime is likely to be found at the place or on the property stated in the warrant.

Apart from search warrants, the judge can issue arrest and bench warrants with convincing evidence. Arrest warrants authorize police to arrest after a prosecutor has filed criminal charges. In contrast, bench warrants are issued by the court after a breach of court conditions, like missing court dates or violating probationary terms.

  1. Probable Cause

Before a judge issues a warrant, the police must satisfy certain conditions. They must have probable cause or a reasonable belief that a crime is occurring or has occurred. The court will determine that there is probable cause if the officer presenting the application or affidavit under oath reasonably believes an ordinary individual to believe that the evidence sought by the police is linked to a crime or is present in a place listed for search in the warrant. The application must be supported by facts and the circumstances, not just the state investigator’s hunch or feeling.

The investigator must know specific facts of the case that give them a reasonable basis to believe a crime has been committed at the search warrant location or that evidence related to the crime is available there.

Before determining whether probable cause exists, the judge questions the police, the prosecutor, the warrant applicant, and the witnesses the investigator relied on to support the warrant.

  1. Contesting a Search or Seizure Authorized By a Judge

Even when a search is done with a valid warrant, it can still be considered unconstitutional and challenged in court. You can contest a warrant if it is invalid or faulty, or the search exceeds the warrant’s scope or results in evidence not listed under the warrant.

A warrant is defective if:

  • The investigators submit misleading facts to compel the judge to issue the warrant

  • The warrant did not specify the search area or seizure items

  • The judge issuing the warrant was not neutral

Search and Seizure Law Exceptions

There are several circumstances in which the police can conduct a search, seizure, or arrest without violating the Fourth Amendment. The police can conduct a search or seizure even in a location where you reasonably expect privacy, without a warrant, if the exception to the search laws applies. These exceptions include:

To Guarantee Public or Police Safety

One exception is when a search is necessary to ensure public or law enforcement safety. Waiting for a judge's warrant could take time, putting the public at risk of harm and necessitating a warrantless search, seizure, or arrest. For instance, the police can conduct a warrantless search in connection with a legal arrest if it is done to protect an officer or safeguard evidence relating to a crime, proof that could have otherwise been destroyed.

The Plain View Deviation

Another exception to the search protection laws is that officers can seize incriminating items in plain view during a search without a warrant.

Emergency Situations Exception

Additionally, in emergencies, law enforcement may search without a warrant under the exigent circumstances exception. For instance, when police are pursuing a fugitive, they may search any surrounding premises, even if private, without a search warrant to effect an arrest.

Search for Residents or Homes Exception

Police can search in the absence of a warrant if they suspect you have approved the search. Anyone with control over private property or a trailer, whether it is your registered domestic partner or a roommate, can agree to a search. However, the officer searching must be reasonably convinced that the person giving consent has the authority to do so. If the officers reasonably believe that the person lacks the authority to consent to the search, they will request a warrant before the search.

Additionally, there should be an imminent danger of harm or severe property damage.

If your roommate is involved, they can only consent to a search in their room or the common areas. However, if the party is your romantic partner and you share the same room, the police will require approval from only one of you. This means they can search your space without a warrant if your romantic partner agrees.

Exceptions for Searches In Traffic Stops

Several rules govern how police should conduct searches during traffic stops. The usual rules and exceptions for search warrants, like seizing contraband in plain view, apply. For instance, during a traffic stop for suspected drinking and driving, police can seize an open container of alcohol upon pulling you over without a warrant.

However, the law limits the officer's actions. They require a reasonable belief that you are engaged in a violation to make the stop. Additionally, they must reasonably believe proof of the violation is in the vehicle or the car occupant’s belongings. The stopping officer can search your trunk, center console, or glove compartment if they reasonably suspect they can find evidence of a crime. Also, they can search the car occupant’s pockets or belongings if they believe they can find proof of a crime there.

Exceptions to Cell Phone and Computer Searches

The police can search your phone, computer hard drive, tablet, or other electronic devices without a warrant if you or another party with authority consents to the search, if there is an emergency requiring the search to assist in an arrest, if there is a threat of imminent harm, if a person has suffered injuries, or if you are transporting the device across international borders.

Even if none of these exceptions apply in your case, the police can confiscate your phone after an arrest without a warrant and keep the device until they obtain one. The confiscation can be justified as a measure to prevent the destruction of evidence.

Before June 2024, warrantless searches of cell phones were allowed after lawful arrest, and the evidence obtained was admissible in court. Today, however, the police will require a warrant for the same unless protection exceptions apply.

Exclusionary Rule

If the police engaged in misconduct during the search, like conducting an unreasonable search and seizure during your arrest, you are entitled to file a motion to suppress the unlawfully obtained proof. If the judge grants your motion, they will dismiss the evidence from the trial, hence the phrase exclusionary rule.”

Before the case starts, your attorney can submit the motion to suppress evidence. If the motion is granted and the court dismisses most or all of the prosecutor's evidence against you, the charges will be reduced or dropped.

The exclusionary rule is not limited to proof obtained in unreasonable searches alone but also to proof indirectly obtained from the search, leading to the birth of the phrase “fruit from a poisonous tree." Here, the poisonous tree is the unreasonable search, while the fruit is any evidence indirectly obtained from the unlawful search.

For instance, the police stop you for suspected possession of controlled drugs. While frisking you, the police find several bags of cocaine. They also confiscate your cell phone and arrest you for drug possession for sale. At the station, they check the phone without a warrant and find messages that indicate you are a drug dealer. Under the circumstances, they can charge you with possession of drugs but not possession for sale because the evidence pointing to the sale was obtained unlawfully and will be dismissed from the case.

Find a Skilled Assert Forfeiture Defense Attorney Near Me

When police obtain evidence against you through an unlawful search or seizure, you should consult with your attorney to understand your rights and how you can benefit from the exclusionary rule.

At Asset Forfeiture Attorney, we will go through all the details of the search and arrest to determine if the police contravened your rights. If there is evidence that your rights were violated, you can file a motion to suppress evidence to strengthen your case. Contact us today at 888-571-5590 to understand your rights in California and Nationwide.