5Th and 6th Amendment

This is why a police officer does not need a warrant when, in the course of a traffic stop, s/he frisks a subject prior to engaging in a discussion with them. The balance of the officer’s personal safety versus the infringement on the privacy of the individual tips in favor of the officer because a reasonable person would perceive the need for safety. Searching the subject or his car for drugs, however, requires a higher standard. Probable cause goes beyond the suspicion that criminal activity has or will take place and moves more into the investigative realm. The probable cause standard is basically the amount of information the police are required to have prior to a search or seizure of property. An office who stops a vehicle for speeding has reasonable suspicion to do so, but does not have authority to search the car. If, however, during the course of the traffic stop the officer sees drug paraphernalia on the back seat, s/he has probable cause to search the cabin of the vehicle—but not the trunk. that requires consent from the individual or a warrant. If a K-9 unit is brought in based on the paraphernalia and the dog “hits” on the trunk, a warrant is easily obtained because the police have probable cause to demonstrate a crime is being committed.
The Fifth Amendment, in relevant part, states that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.…” (Cornell, 2008, n.p.). The purpose of the clause is to prevent unreasonable searches and seizures similar to that experienced under the British Colonial rule of the American Colonies. The basic premise is that government actors (police officers, prosecutors, other officials) cannot deprive a defendant of life, liberty, or property at a whim or based on nameless suspicion. there is a responsibility held by the officers to ensure that all of a citizen’s rights are protected. The action is