Everyone should be trained to assert their constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment in order to avoid the hassle and humiliation of police misconduct and illegal searches. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics report on citizen-police contacts...

No. The Fourth Amendment guarantees the right of people to be free from unreasonable searches and violations of privacy. The Fourth Amendment states, "The right of 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 person or things to be seized." To determine what might be unreasonable, a "legitimate expectation of privacy" must be established.

Simply put, the number of arrests an officer makes is a major factor used to determine his job performance. Police officers know that the easiest way to make arrests is to find people in possession of illegal drugs, so they want to search everyone they can find. Statistics have shown that...

As a general rule, searches conducted without a valid search warrant signed by a judge violate the Fourth Amendment, but like most rules of law, there are a number of explicit exceptions. In fact, most searches occur without warrants because police take advantage of these exceptions to the Fourth Amendment.

The sad fact is that most people believe that they are under some kind of obligation to acquiesce when an officer contacts them and asks permission to search them or their belongings. The truth is exactly the opposite...

No. If a police officer asks your permission to search, you are under no obligation to consent. The main reason why officers ask is because they don't have enough evidence to search without your consent. Don't expect an officer to tell you of your right not to consent. Any time you consent to a search request you are naively waiving your constitutional rights.

Unfortunately, many people get fooled by some version of this commonly used police officer's line: "Everything will be easier if you just cooperate". That's true to some extent -- it will make things much easier for the police officer who's trying to arrest you! -- but when it comes to you consenting to searches and answering incriminating questions, it couldn't be further from the truth.

This is one of those "it depends on the circumstances" questions. Police can obtain consent to search from anyone with control over the property; however any occupant of a residence can refuse consent, even if other occupants agree to a search. Unfortunately, you must be present in order to assert your refusal. The Supreme Court has ruled that...

Don't be intimidated by police at your door. These rules will help protect your rights and improve your odds of avoiding a home search.

Unfortunately, police may sometimes search you even if you refuse consent. If they find anything illegal, you'll have to get a lawyer and fight it out in court, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the search will hold up.

This is a tricky situation. Of course you should never admit to having illegal items, but you also should make every effort to avoid lying to police. You're always free to remain silent, and police may not hold your silence against you as evidence of wrong-doing (especially if you assert your rights with confidence).

Yes. Police can, will, and often do lie -- especially if it helps them make arrests. The rules regarding entrapment usually tip in favor of law-enforcement, so police won't hesitate to trick you into incriminating yourself or others...

This is a complex question, and there is no black and white answer -- only one big gray area.

Reasonable suspicion is the legal standard by which a police officer has the right to briefly detain a suspect for investigatory purposes and frisk the outside of their clothing for weapons. Though it does not require hard evidence, it does require more than just a hunch.

No. The Supreme Court has never ruled that police must present the warrant when performing a search. The purpose of the warrant is to...

Possibly. If a judge decides the evidence was gathered improperly, it may not be allowed into evidence. However, there are many legal loopholes that may allow the evidence to be admitted anyway, and the prosecutor may still be able to effectively try the case even without the evidence.

An officer who detains an individual without just cause, depriving an individual of his or her freedom without sufficient reason or authority, can potentially be sued along with the police department.

No. Charges were not filed and you were not booked. However, if, at a later date, the police determine that there is cause to file charges, you could still be arrested.

No, they are not the same. At the arraignment, your friend will appear before a judge who will tell him, officially, of the charges. The preliminary hearing is more about the prosecutor. It's when they must establish that there is reasonable grounds to proceed to trial against your friend. Read More +

The purpose of bail is to ensure that the accused will return to court for trial, and the judge will make a determination as to what amount of bail is appropriate based on a number of different factors...

"Arrested" means you have been taken into custody and can't leave. You can be "detained" for a short period of time if a police officer or other person believes you may be involved in a crime. In either case, you should assert your 5th Amendment right to remain silent and speak to an attorney before saying anything to the police.

A warrant is usually required when you're taken into custody at your home, but not necessary elsewhere. If there is concern that you might flee, destroy evidence or harm someone else, you can be arrested at home even without a warrant.

No. If you're arrested, don't rely on police to inform you of your right to remain silent and see a lawyer. It's up to you to assert those rights. Tell them "I'm exercising my right to remain silent and I would like to see a lawyer." If police persist in questioning you, repeat those magic words. The courts have made it clear that police officers do not have to tell people that they can refuse to consent to a warrantless search. Also, contrary to the belief perpetuated by popular police television shows, a person will not be read their rights subsequent to being taken into custody. A person only needs to be Mirandized when...

Yes. If you've been arrested, you need only say, "I want to speak with an attorney" or "I have nothing to say now." You don't have to say anything after that.

After being booked, you'll be able to make local phone calls (generally up to three). "Booking" includes your arrest being written into official police records, fingerprinting and being photographed.

Yes, you're generally allowed to complete calls. While the number of calls allowed may vary from place to place, the average number is three.

If you feel that your rights have been violated by police, do not panic. There are several steps to the process of combating police misconduct, and you must approach them in a calm and organized manner.

Videotaping or photographing police in public places is usually legal, so long as you don't interfere with their activities. Nonetheless, doing so will often get you arrested.

This is a tricky issue. The simple answer is that citizens who are minding their own business are not obligated to "show their papers" to police. In fact, there is no law requiring citizens to carry identification of any kind. Once you get passed the surface, however, things get much more complicated...

During a legitimate traffic stop, police may order the driver and any passengers out of the vehicle. This rule is intended to protect officers' safety, but it's often used for investigatory purposes.

While police generally need a warrant to search you or your property, during a traffic stop police only need probable cause to legally search your vehicle. Probable cause means police must have some facts or evidence to believe you're involved in criminal activity.

Traffic stops typically occur as a result of suspected moving violations committed by the driver of the vehicle. Passengers cannot be held responsible for the driver's conduct and are generally free to leave, unless police become suspicious of them during the course of the stop. Unfortunately, this happens frequently and the amount of evidence required to detain passengers is minimal...

If police say they smell marijuana coming from your vehicle, you're in a tough situation. Courts have ruled that the odor of contraband gives officers probable cause to perform a search. For this reason, police are quick to claim that they smell something and sometimes they might even lie about it.

Your rights do not disappear if the officer threatens to call in the dogs, so don't let this all-too-common tactic intimidate you into consenting to a search. You have several options...

That depends. The answer is as long as it reasonably takes police to conduct the investigation. For example, if you've been stopped for speeding, police can technically only detain you long enough to check your paperwork and write you a speeding ticket. However, if the officer discovers evidence of other criminal activity during the stop, they may legally prolong the investigation. Every police encounter is different and the specific circumstances will always determine what it considered a reasonable detention.

In addition to compromising your safety and the safety of others, driving drunk is one of the stupidest things you can do, and one of the easiest ways to create overwhelming legal problems for yourself. DUI laws vary from state to state, and they have become increasingly harsh over the years...

There are several types of roadblocks -- sobriety/DUI, emergency, border, drugs -- and they're all quite different from one another...

No. We believe that most police officers are good, hardworking people who are doing a tough job. We need police to safeguard the life, liberty, and property of all people. To do this best, police officers should be trained to serve as peace officers whose goal is to preserve people's constitutional rights. In other words, the number of arrests an officer makes should not be a factor used to determine his job performance. Instead, we believe that performance should be measured by the officer's ability to maintain a safe, peaceful neighborhood and earn the residents' trust.

No. We teach people that they have rights, and that these rights are secured by the principal documents that guarantee our civil liberties -- the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. An informed individual who invokes his constitutional protections is doing exactly what our nation's founders intended. They created these documents to...

Yes. Minors generally have the same rights as adults. For example, minors can refuse searches and decline to answer questions without an attorney present. Nevertheless, minors face unique challenges when attempting to exercise these rights...

College students suffer from an unfortunate lack of privacy rights in many situations. The university owns the dorm, so school officials can often search rooms at their own discretion. College students still have 4th Amendment rights that apply in other situations...

Be aware that private security personnel outnumber police officers in the United States by three to one. As a result, you may be more likely to be confronted by a security guard than by a police officer. You must also be aware of the following places where security personnel (governmental or otherwise) are permitted to search you without a warrant...

Be aware that Transportation Security Agency (TSA) agents -- which are part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) -- are permitted to search you and your belongings without probable cause or a search warrant any time you pass through a TSA security zone.

That's largely a myth. There are many reasons to be concerned about the constitutional impact of the PATRIOT Act, NDAA and the War on Terror in general, but it doesn't reduce your rights during a routine police encounter. Anti-terrorism legislation gives federal agents broad powers to investigate potential terrorist activities, but it doesn't apply to the local cops in our neighborhoods or the state police patrolling our highways. As far as the powers of your local sheriff or state highway patrol are concerned, they have had zero impact. If you're accused of terrorism, you've got big problems, but chances are you won't be sent to Guantanamo Bay for refusing to give consent to a search!

Generally not. The Bill of Rights protections that matter most during police encounters are mandated by the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, and all states are required to follow them. States can offer more protection of these rights, but not less. There are some variations regarding...