Legal Aspects

LEGAL ASPECTS At the District Court of Appeals level , the Court will review all of the evidence and the court records to determine if the lower court made a legally sound decision . The Appellate Court does not initiate an entire trial process again , rather they review all of the submitted evidence and records viewed and heard by the lower court . If the Appellate Court decides there were not any defects they will affirm ' the judgment and allow it to stand . However , if the Appellate Court does find a defect they have several

options . First , they may modify ' the decision which allows the Appellate Court to correct the error . Second , the Appellate Court may reverse ' or nullify ' the decision entirely or any part of the decision . Finally the Appellate Court may remand ' or remit ' the decision which sends the case back to the lower court for further proceedings in an attempt to correct the defect that the Appellate Court identified

The Appeallate Court would most likely affirm the decision from the case presented . Even though the issue as to the informant was not raised it is presumed this was a credible and reliable witness for the agents to act accordingly . Therefore the issues that the Appellate Court will consider are the issues relating to the FBI Agents conduct when searching Amir and his luggage

The Fourth Amendment guarantees the right of people to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures , thus requiring a warrant from a law enforcement agency before searching any person or their property However , there are exceptions to the warrant requirement and they contain emergency situations as well as the automobile exception . The emergency exception provides that if evidence would be destroyed while obtaining a warrant then the law enforcement may execute the search . The automobile exception allows for the search of the automobile compartment if there is probable cause . Probable cause may be as simple as being pulled over for a traffic violation . This exception does not include packages or contents in the trunk of the automobile though

The facts of the case do not present any exigent circumstances in which the FBI Agents conducted themselves . In , United States v . Chadwick , 433 US 1 (1977 , the Court held , In the absence of exigent circumstances police are required to obtain a warrant before searching luggage taken from an automobile properly stopped and searched for contraband Exigent circumstances can best be described as an emergency situation and by the agents own admissions they clearly had ample time to obtain a warrant prior to Amir 's arrival

The Court in Arkansas v . Sanders was also presented with an issue as to an exception of the warrant requirement . The Court said

In sum , we hold that the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment applies to personal luggage taken from an automobile to the same degree it applies to such luggage in other locations . Thus , insofar as the police are entitled to search such luggage without a warrant , their actions must be justified under some exception to the warrant requirement other than that applicable to automobiles stopped on the highway . Where -- as in the present case -- the police , without endangering themselves or risking loss of the evidence , lawfully have detained one suspected of criminal activity and secured his suitcase they should delay the search thereof until after judicial approval has been obtained . In this way , constitutional rights of suspects to prior judicial review of searches will be fully protected

The agents presumed that if they allowed Amir to enter a car they then would have probable cause to search the luggage once they executed the stop of the taxi cab . However , Amir had placed the bag in the trunk of the taxi cab and due to the actions of the Agents , they violated the warrant requirement . The FBI Agents who executed the search had ample time once the bag was in their possession to obtain a search warrant and conduct the search in a controlled atmosphere such as the FBI Office or a local law enforcement office . The FBI Agents had several inappropriate actions in this case and by these actions and lack of structure the case will be affirmed at the District Court of Appeals The first is the Agents should have obtained a warrant prior to arriving at the airport and second , once the bag was in their possession they should have obtained a warrant then prior to searching . Based on the information alone from the informant the FBI had reasonable suspicion and upon seeing Amir exit the airplane they then had probable cause for a search . The court will affirm the decision as the Fourth Amendment is a fundamental right that is deeply rooted into the very stream of the American way of life

United States Constitution

United States v . Chadwick , 433 U .S . 1 . Pp . 757-766

Arkansas v . Sanders , 1979 .SCT .2335 , 442 U .S . 753 , 99 S . Ct . 2586 , 61 L . Ed . 2d 235 ...