Illinois v. Wardlow 528 U.S.119 (Case law) Research Paper

Illinois v. Wardlow 528 U.S.119 (Case law) - Research Paper ExampleThey name a hand gaseous state from him and later o arrest him for further enquiry. When the racing shell was presented in the Illinois Trial court, Wardlaws motion in that empyrean was denied to suppress by the court and they also gave the judgment as the gun was found during a legal stop and search operation. But state Appellate Court prohibit the decision stating that there was not enough evidence of doubt for Nolan to stop and search Wardlaw. Latter on Supreme Court stated the fact that sudden movement or flight in a high umbrage zone could not be a reason to suspect and stop-search an individual as the movement bathroom be treated like right to go on ones way. But as the suspect tried to flight from the place because the further investigating can be carry on. (Legal Information Institute, 2000). The Fourth Amendment of US law did support the action of the patrol office. According to Ferguson & Bernache ( 2008), under the guidelines of the Supreme Court, lower court while giving any decision can consider an area as high crime area as a factor to look backward the reasonableness of Fourth Amendment stop. But the definition of high crime area was not mentioned by the highest court, and therefore a lot of controversies were there during Illinois v Wardlaw case. After this incident, the need of defining high crime area was understood. According to them, high crime area could be defined based on three diametric parameters, such as the area have to be marked by high degree of particularised criminal activities, the geographical boundary of that area have to be specified and thirdly the assigned jurisprudence officer adjacent to that specific area should have knowledge about the boundary of the high crime area (Ferguson & Bernach, 2008, p.1586). According to Amar (1994), the Fourth amendment always calls for warrants and probable cause for any kind of police searches and excision of veh icle obtained illegally from any individual or group of people (Amar, 1994, p.757). Carmen and Walker(2011), in their writing presented this case with analysis as how the fourth amendment was imposed on Wardlaw by the two police officer and whether it was excusable or not. According to the