Blog
Subscribe to this list via RSS Blog posts tagged in Fourth Amendment

implied consent, Fourth Amendment, Arlington Heights family law attorneyIn the state of Illinois, just as in most states in this country, when a person gets their driver’s license, there is “implied consent” that the person will submit to testing to gather a sample of their blood, breath, or urine to law enforcement if they have been arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. If a person refuses to submit to that testing, their licence will be automatically suspended for one year. If it is their second or subsequent refusal, they will automatically have their license suspended for three years. This suspension of driving privileges is separate from the actual driving under the influence (DUI) charge or penalties if they are found guilty. However, a ruling by the Georgia Supreme Court regarding implied consent could have far reaching consequences on every state’s implied consent laws.

The case in question involved a man who was arrested in 2012 and charged with drunk driving. According to court records, the man was not advised of his Miranda rights, but the arresting officer read an implied consent notice and told the man to answer yes or no. The man was then taken to a medical facility where he had blood and urine samples taken.

Ability to Grant Consent?

...

Arlington Heights criminal defense attorney, computer hacking, Fourth Amendment, illegal search and seizure, Illinois criminal defense lawyer, install malware, install spyware software, Law Offices of Scott F. Anderson, probable cause, Rule 41, U.S. Department of Justice, unreasonable searches and seizuresThe U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has submitted proposed changes to the law which would make it easier for law enforcement to obtain warrants in order to hack into a criminal suspect’s computer. The proposed changes were presented to the Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules. The federal search warrant rules are known as "Rule 41."

According to the DOJ, the biggest hindrances they run into when trying to execute a warrant for a suspect’s computer is when the location of the computer is unknown or the suspect has multiple computers. Members of the committee, while debating the DOJ’s proposal, pointed out that the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, requires warrants to "particularly" describe the item to be searched. The Fourth Amendment reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Allowing warrants for a computer that law enforcement could not provide a location or IP address for could violate that part of the amendment. The DOJ’s response to that concern was that would be an issue that would need to be decided by the courts. If approved, law enforcement would be able to obtain a warrant from a district court where activities related to a crime had occurred, but not where the suspect’s computer or computers were located. The warrant would be executed remotely. One way law enforcement could execute the warrant is via sending an email. This email would be embedded with a code that would install spyware software onto the recipient’s computer. Another example in which warrants could be remotely executed is by installing malware directly on a website, such as a child porn site, that would collect the identities of visitors to that website. If you have been arrested and charged with a crime based on an illegal search and seizure, contact an experienced Arlington Heights criminal defense attorney to make sure that your rights are protected in the courtroom.

CALL US TODAY AT 847-253-3400 FOR A FREE INITIAL CONSULTATION