3. The police entered Mr. Anderson's home without a warrant and without "probable cause." Which constitutional right of Mr. Anderson was violated? A. The Fifth Amendment right of double jeopardy. B. The Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. C. The Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches. D. The Sixth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishments.

Question

3. The police entered Mr. Anderson's home without a warrant and without "probable cause." Which constitutional right of Mr. Anderson was violated? A. The Fifth Amendment right of double jeopardy. B. The Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. C. The Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches. D. The Sixth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishments.

Answer 1

C. The Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches.

Answer 2

## Step 1The problem is about understanding the rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. This means that the police must have a warrant, which is a legal document issued by a judge or a magistrate, to search a person's property. ## Step 2In this case, the police entered Mr. Anderson's home without a warrant and without "probable cause". This means that the police did not have a valid reason to believe that a crime had been committed or that evidence of a crime could be found in Mr. Anderson's home.## Step 3Given this situation, it is clear that the Fourth Amendment right of Mr. Anderson, which protects against unreasonable searches, was violated.

Problemas

Roztwór

Respuesta

Explicación