Maryland v. King: A Case Study on the Fourth Amendment and Civil Law

This case study analyzes the Maryland v. King Supreme Court case, focusing on its implications for the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The assignment examines the court's ruling on the legality of searches and seizures, specifically addressing whether taking fingerprints and other evidence from detainees aligns with the Fourth Amendment. The author argues that while evidence collection from detainees accused of serious crimes is justifiable, it should be subject to judicial oversight to prevent potential abuses of power by law enforcement. The study references the U.S. Constitution, the Fourth Amendment, and the Bill of Rights, and argues that the ruling has the potential to negatively impact detainees within the criminal justice system.

Running head: CIVIL LAW
Civil Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CIVIL LAW
The Fourth Amendment Constitution of United States forms a part under the bill of rights
which insurance certain rights of a person by way of ten amendments. The Fourth
Amendment restricts any search as well as seizure, which is unreasonable, in case the same
has not been backed by a warrant issued by a magistrate or a judge and a justified cause. The
viability of the decision of Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435 (2013) has been question on the
Fourth Amendment. In this regard, it has been contended by the Supreme Court that if an
officer makes an arrest, which has been backed by a probable cause and that cause is related
to a serious offence and in that furtherance, the detainee has been brought to the police
station, any availing of fingerprints, photograph or any other evidence will be treated as
legitimate and will be treated as in conformity with the fourth amendment. This in my
opinion is a scope that has been made accessible towards the officers to abuse their power to
make seizures and searches. This has the implication of the use of this power in an arbitrary
manner. It is justified to take evidence from a detainee who has been alleged to have
committed a henious crime, but a proper supervision of a judge or a magistrate is required
over the actions of the police in this furtherance. This decision of the supreme court has the
probability of causing a deprivation of the detainees under the criminal justice system.

2CIVIL LAW
References
Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435 (2013)
The Constitution of the United States
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution
The United States Bill of Rights