Why choose us?

100% custom research papers.

Satisfaction guaranteed, first-hand Research Paper written as an all-original work

Research Papers are not resold to other clients. Hence, all Research Paper are written as ordered.

As experience speaks for itself, our company assures that writers have apprehended different styles of making Research Paper.

High quality custom term papers.

A1Essays provides an array of writers that has the mastery of producing qualitative works.

Spearheading our services, custom written quality Research Paper are warranted original and copy-paste style is strictly prohibited

More than the experience, writers are geared with good educational background and high degree attainment, considering them as MA and PhD holders

Non-plagiarized custom term paper.

All Research Paper are original. In addition, it has been under the strict supervision of the company based on plagiarism-detecting software used

Based on the type of citation to be used, the essays produced were surely referenced accordingly. Avoidance of misconceptions and works with no citations are strictly monitored by the company.

All works are guaranteed to be professionally created with no rephrased or recopied parts of the Research Paper. Hence, all works are plagiarism-free.

Exceptional customer service.

A1Essays provides an array of writers that has the mastery of producing qualitative works

All revisions and alterations are definitely free of charge

Tracking the process of the paper is allowable and inquiries are accepted.

All citation types are credited and used by writers.

The negotiation of the production of papers is strictly between the client, the company and the writer. Any other discussion regarding the paper is strictly prohibited.

Custom research papers at affordable prices.

Our rates are the lowest in the industry. Dare to compare.


Constitutional Law Portfolio
A1_132 Offline
8.25/10
Total Rate:(4)
  • 19 Orders Finished
  • 0 Orders Cancelled
  • 0 Orders in Progress
  • 0 Extensions Requested
  • 680 Number of Pages Written


Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


Rating's


Constitutional Law Portfolio
A1-w036 Offline
8.63/10
Total Rate:(16)
  • 120 Orders Finished
  • 0 Orders Cancelled
  • 0 Orders in Progress
  • 0 Extensions Requested
  • 4354 Number of Pages Written


The Change in the Fourth Amendment Law of Warrantless Search of a Vehicle Incident to Arrest since New York v. Belton (1981)

The Fourth Amendment to the United States (US) Constitution protects the citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures and warrantless arrests. Interpretations of the constitutional provision has been traditionally viewed as the conflict between the citizen’s right to privacy and the ability of the law enforcers to carry out searches and eventually, arrests. The Supreme Court has attempted to resolve the varying interpretations of the law by at least two methods: determining the reasonableness of the search on a case-to-case basis, and through the “bright-line rule” (Silk, 1987). In New York v. Belton (1981), the bright-line rule was used as an exception for a law enforcer “who has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of a car to search the passenger compartment of the car as a contemporaneous incident of the arrest.” The bright lines refer to the areas that may be searched by the police officers, and in the case of vehicle search and as established by Belton, these are the compartment and any containers inside the vehicle (Silk, 1987). As such, police officers have been made aware that when they flag down a car, they may search the compartment and containers inside it. What they were inadequately informed about was that Belton has limitations, based on the earlier ruling on California v. Chimel (1969). According to the US Supreme Court decision on Chimel, an arresting officer may only search the area “within the immediate control” of the person arrested, or the area from which the arrestee can gain possession of a weapon or destroy evidence. This means the search is only allowed because of two conditions: it is possible that the arrestee can retrieve a gun and harm the officer, or reach the evidence and destroy it. Police officers used Belton to justify their search incident to arrest of Rodney Joseph Gant in 2009, based on the knowledge that they are allowed to search car compartments and containers. The US Supreme Court ruled the search in Arizona v. Gant (2009) unconstitutional and reminded that the police may only search a vehicle if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search. During his arrest, Gant already stepped out of his car, was handcuffed and locked in a patrol car, with several back-up police officers on scene (Waksman, 2012). Hence, he was not within the reaching distance of his car’s compartment, and as such, he could neither harm the police officers present nor destroy evidence when he was arrested. The decision on Gant shows that the broad reading of the Belton’s bright line rule is unfounded. Some might describe it as a vacillation of the judiciary (Silk, 1987) but through a closer reading of the jurisprudence, there are limitations that shaped judicial decisions thereafter. This paper, then shall review the changes in the interpretations of the Fourth Amendment law with the aim of informing law enforcers when they are trespassing the bounds of the Constitution.


Rating's


Constitutional Law Portfolio
Offline
7.11/10
Total Rate:(55)
  • 0 Orders Finished
  • 0 Orders Cancelled
  • 0 Orders in Progress
  • 0 Extensions Requested
  • 4494 Number of Pages Written



Rating's