The law of

search and seizure Search and seizure is a procedure used in many civil law and common law legal systems by which police or other authorities and their agents, who, suspecting that a crime has been committed, commence a search of a person's property and confisca ...

in Pennsylvania is controlled by both the United States Constitution and the broader protections of the

Pennsylvania Constitution The Constitution of Pennsylvania is the supreme law within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. All acts of the General Assembly, the governor, and each governmental agency are subordinate to it. Since 1776, Pennsylvania's Constitution has undergone ...

. This article is concerned only with the protections provided by the Pennsylvania Constitution.

Overview

Police officers and other law enforcement officials are limited in the means of investigation that they may utilize. That is, the law limits the ways in which police officers can investigate and arrest a person suspected of a crime. In the event a law enforcement official violates these rules, evidence obtained may be suppressed, which essentially means that the prosecution may not use the evidence in court to convict a defendant of the crime charged. Successful suppression of evidence often means the prosecution will not be able to make out the charges, and the defendant gets to go home. This article provides an overview summary of some of the major topics in Pennsylvania search and seizure jurisprudence.

Relationship between the U.S. Constitution and the Pennsylvania Constitution

The

US Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point of ...

's interpretation of the Fourth Amendment do not control the

Pennsylvania Supreme Court The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is the highest court in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's Unified Judicial System. It also claims to be the oldest appellate court in the United States, a claim that is disputed by the Massachusetts Supreme Ju ...

's interpretation of the protections under Article I § 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. ''See'', ''e.g.'', ''Commonwealth v. Edmunds'', 586 A.2d 887 (1991). In fact, Federal Fourth Amendment decisions establish the constitutional floor, but Pennsylvania is free to offer heightened protections to her citizens.

The "Reasonable Expectation" of Privacy

In order for a person to receive protection under Article I § 8 (and the Fourth Amendment), (1) that person must have exhibited a subjective,

expectation of privacy Expectation of privacy is a legal test which is crucial in defining the scope of the applicability of the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is related to, but is not the same as, a ''right to privac ...

and (2) that expectation must be one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable. ''See

Katz v. United States ''Katz v. United States'', 389 U.S. 347 (1967), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court redefined what constitutes a "search" or "seizure" with regard to the protections of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constituti ...

'', 389 U.S. 347 (1967); ''Commonwealth v. Lowery'', 451 A.2d 245 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1982). It is the Defendant's burden to establish his or her privacy interest; after the privacy interest is established, the Commonwealth then needs to show that the subject evidence was not illegally obtained. ''Commonwealth v. Millner'', 888 A.2d 680 (Pa. 2005); ''Commonwealth v. Perea'', 791 A.2d 427 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2002).

Vehicles

On 30 April 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided with a 4-2 margin that exigency was no longer necessary, so long as the search based on the automobile exception to the warrant requirement is based on probable cause and the vehicle is readily mobile. However, on December 22, 2020, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overruled its prior decision in ''Gary''. The Court established that Pa. Const. art. I, § 8 afforded greater protection to Commonwealth citizens than the Fourth Amendment, U.S. Const. amend. IV, and reaffirmed that the Pennsylvania Constitution requires both a showing of probable cause and exigent circumstances to justify a warrantless search of an automobile. "Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Alexander"
/ref>

References

External links