This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: of a non-resident and located outside the United States under the United States v. Verdugo-Uruidez case. Gorshkov argued against the Verdugo case by claiming that he voluntarily entered the country and therefore, should be protected by the Fourth Amendment. The court found that a single entry into the country with a criminal purpose does not give you protecting under the Fourth Amendment. Even if the Fourth Amendment applied, the court ruled that the search and seizure was reasonable. Because there was a risk that the evidence could be destroyed by one of Gorshkovs men while getting a warrant, the court said that a temporary seizure that was supported by probable cause and designed to prevent the loss of evidence while the police diligently obtained a warrant in a reasonable period of time (Cyberlaw) was legal under the Illinois v. MacArthur cases....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 01/12/2011 for the course COMM 458 taught by Professor Sparr during the Fall '08 term at University of Michigan.
- Fall '08