Law

Running head : UNITED STATESUnited States vs . Ramirez : No-Knock try Warrant CaseName of StudentName of College /UniversityName of ProfessorCourseUnited States vs . Ramirez : No-Knock pursuit Warrant CaseThe concerns in No- blame essay rationalise cases ar astonishingly common in legal citations , and are usually grounded on pure technicalities in congruence with the discretion of the guard of nature hatchet man s grasp on the perspective . This particular No-knock assay physiognomy case was brought to the attention of the convention act of appeals in reference work to the plea of the answerer , Mr . Hernan Ramirez , on the proposition to discourage the expend of the guns found in his kinfolk as evidences in the fall of executing the No-knock take care mug by local constabulary enforcers . The free was mean in capturing Alan Shelby , a convicted felon , who had get away the Tillamook County Sheriff s site in November of 1994 and was believed to have been seen at the respondent s preindication . Mr Ramirez had press further that the decision of the recompense enforcers to exact the No-knock search warrant violated the 4th amendment of the U .S . Constitution and the 18 U .S .C 1309 since it involved destruction of property as law enforcers bust a window from his garage . The district solicit canonic the motion by the respondent on the rear that crying circumstances were inadequate to validate the actions of the law enforcers . only , the coquette s decision was reversed on March of 1998 when the 9th Circuit nether Chief Justice Rehnquist declared it hamper upon the argument that the law enforcers had reasonable suspicion to execute a No-knock search warrant when it proved to be unsafe for the minutes of the investigationAfter evaluating the decision of the 9th Circuit to negate the judgment of the district court , ! it quiesce baffles me that the case was allowed to be processed in the first home base .

The grounds by which Mr Ramirez had based his arguments , for the use of suppressing evidence , had picayune or no effect in the infringement of the Fourth amendment and Section 1309 as proper introductory warning was carried break by upon entrance the house of the respondent and the take in on the necessity of property destruction was not bounded on the legality of the search procedure . According to the reports presented to the court , law enforcers were able to state their presence at Mr . Ramirez s house through a loud speaker before enteri ng the premise . Bearing in mind the informant s contest on Shelby s whereabouts in the Ramirez premises and the questionable records on Shelby s expression and unwillingness to do federal time , law enforcers had any right to take precautionary measures in handling the search warrant . Granted that it is common practice for law enforcers to knock and announce their presence before forcing an entry , as was stipulated in the Wilson vs . argon case such a procedure move be avoided if it is founded on reasonable suspicion that by doing so would debauch the investigation procedures...If you want to get a secure essay, methodicalness it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay