The Fourth Amendment to the US constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searches (in their houses, persons, effects and papers). Police ought to convince a judge that they have reasonable evidence before they are given a search warrant. Criminal defendants might raise this in court if their right was abused (Levy et al. 86). The Sixth Amendment ensures that criminal defendants are accorded a public and speedy trial by a jury that is impartial and within the jurisdiction of where the case was committed. The eighth amendment protects criminal defendants from punishments that are cruel and unusual.
The Fourth amendment to the constitution has affected the procedures implemented in law enforcement, courts and correctional facilities. Arresting has become a major issue of concern. With this right, it has become difficult for officers to arrest citizens when they do not have the warrants. This may give the criminals an opportunity to run away (Levy et al. 92). To mitigate, the courts have introduced a new system where there are exceptions to having a search warrant before searching someone. However, in order to do so, the police officer is required to have a reasonable believe that the potential criminal is engaging in crime or illegal activities.
I fully agree with the implementation of this right in the criminal justice system. At times, there is confusion when police officers believe that somebody is engaging in illegal activities. However, lack of a search warrant used to be a major constraint to making searches (Levy et al. 101). With the exceptions that the criminal justice system has introduced, police officers can act swiftly even without the search warrant. This has helped arrest criminals. Without these exceptions, it would be difficult to make the arrests.
Levy, Leonard W. "Origins of the Fourth Amendment." Political Science Quarterly (2013): 79-101. Print.