Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Weeks v. US. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 5 page paper that summarizes this landmark 1914 Supreme Court case, which established that evidence obtained by illegal search and seizure, that is, without a proper warrant, would be inadmissible in American courts. Bibliography lists 1 source.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_khwv.us.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
purpose of transporting lottery tickets, which violated statute 213 of the criminal code for that state. The record shows that Weeks was arrested, without the use of a warrant,
at Union Station in Kansas City, Missouri, where he held a job with an express company. While this was occurring, other police officers had gone to where Weeks was living.
A neighbor told them where to find a key and they entered Weeks residence without a search warrant. Evidence against Weeks was obtained from a search of his room and
the police took possession of various papers, which were turned over to the U.S. marshal. The police returned to Weeks residence later that day with the marshal, again entered the
house without a warrant. Various papers belonging to Weeks were also ceased. According to the petition filed by Weeks for the return of his papers, the confiscated articles included
"books, letters, money, paper, notes, evidences of indebtedness, stock, certificates, insurance policies, deeds, abstracts, and other muniments of title, bonds, candies, clothes and other property" (Weeks v. US, 232
U.S. 383). Weeks petition argued that the fact that this confiscation of property was done without warrant or authority constituted a violation of sections 11 and 23 of the Constitution
of Missouri and of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Pertinent to this petition, the court ordered that the property that was not
directly related to the prosecution of the case against the defendant should be returned. However, the court denied the return of documents pertinent to the case. When his papers were
introduced as evidence against him at this trial, the defendant objected on the grounds that the evidence had been obtained illegally. This objection was overruled. Issue The issue in
...