Section V: Warrantless Searches That Are Incident to Arrest

　　This section deals with warrantless searches that are considered valid¹ because they were made in the course of making a valid arrest.

　　31. Can an Officer Legally Search Me After Arresting Me?

　　Yes. Police officers do not need a warrant to make a search "incident to an arrest." After an arrest, police officers have the right to protect themselves by searching for weapons and to protect the legal case against the suspect by searching for evidence that the suspect might try to destroy. Assuming that the officer has probable cause to make the arrest in the first place, a search of the person and the person's surroundings following the arrest is valid, and any evidence uncovered is admissible at trial.

　　32. If I'm Arrested on the Street or in a Shopping Mall, Can the Arresting Officer Search My Dwelling² or Car?

　　No. To justify³ a search as incident to an arrest, a spatial⁴ relationship must exist between the arrest and the search. The general rule is that after arrest the police may search a defendant⁵ and the area within a defendant's immediate⁶ control. （Chimel v. California, U.S. Sup. Ct. 1969.） For example, an arresting officer may search not only a suspect's clothes, but also a suspect's wallet or purse. If an arrest takes place in a kitchen, the arresting officer can probably search the kitchen, but not the rest of the house. If an arrest takes place outside a house, the arresting officer cannot search the house at all. To conduct a search broader in scope than a defendant and the area within the defendant's immediate control, an officer would have to obtain a warrant.

　　Case Example: Officer Montoya arrests Sarah Adams for driving under the influence of illegal drugs. Before taking Sarah to jail, Officer Montoya takes Sarah's key and enters her apartment. Inside, Officer Montoya finds a number of computers that turn out—after a check of their serial⁷ numbers—to have been stolen. Officer Montoya seizes the computers as evidence and adds possession of stolen property to the charges against Sarah.

　　Question: Are the computers admissible in evidence?

　　Answer: No. The officer should have obtained a search warrant before entering Sarah's apartment. Since Officer Montoya had no right to be inside the house in the first place, it doesn't matter that the computers were in plain view once the officer was inside.

　　Don't Go Back in the House

　　When the police arrest suspects outside their residences and have no basis for making a protective sweep, officers may try to expand the scope of a permissible⁸ search by offering to let suspects go inside to get a change of clothes, feed a pet, etc. before taking the suspect to jail. While accompanying the suspect inside the residence, officers can seize whatever may be in plain view （for instance, drugs）. Thus, suspects may wisely refuse an invitation by the arresting officers to let the suspect enter the residence, and instead rely on their friends if they need clothes or pet feeding.

　　翻译句子：
　　1、To justify a search as incident to an arrest, a spatial relationship must exist between the arrest and the search
　　2、a protective sweep
　　3、Thus, suspects may wisely refuse an invitation by the arresting officers to let the suspect enter the residence, and instead rely on their friends if they need clothes or pet feeding.

　　答案：
　　1、为证明逮捕后附带搜查的正当合法，逮捕和搜查之间必须存在空间上的联系。
　　2、保护性搜查
　　3、因此，嫌疑犯最好理智地拒绝警官请自己回屋的好意，而是请朋友帮忙拿自己的衣服或代养宠物

上一篇：法律英语导读(43) 下一篇：法律英语导读(45)