California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Southern (In re Southern), A143740 (Cal. App. 2015):
legal principles are relevant, independently apply them to the historical facts, and determine as a matter of law whether there has been an unreasonable search and/or seizure' [citation]." (People v. Hochstraser (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 883, 894.) This standard of review is "equally applicable to juvenile court proceedings." (In re Lennies H. (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 1232, 1236.)
Under the Fourth Amendment, people are " 'secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.' " (Maryland v. Pringle (2003) 540 U.S. 366, 369 (Pringle).) A "'custodial arrest of a suspect based on probable cause is a reasonable intrusion under the Fourth Amendment; that intrusion being lawful, a search incident to the arrest requires no additional justification.' " (Riley v. California (2014) ___ U.S. ___ [134 S.Ct. 2473, 2483, 189 L.Ed.2d 430].)
" 'Probable cause exists when the facts known to the arresting officer would persuade someone of "reasonable caution" that the person to be arrested has committed a crime.' " (People v. Thompson (2006) 38 Cal.4th 811, 818.) "To determine whether an officer had probable cause to arrest an individual, we examine the events leading up to the arrest, and then decide 'whether these historical facts, viewed from the standpoint of an objectively reasonable police officer, amount to' probable cause [citation]." (Pringle, supra, 540 U.S. at p. 371.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.