Police searches often feel invasive. No one wants an officer to go through their home or their vehicle. A bodily search, also called a frisk or pat-down, is arguably the most invasive type of search that police officers may conduct.
They physically check someone’s body for illegal or dangerous items. Sometimes, what officers find when they frisk people leads to an arrest and then criminal prosecution. Occasionally, defense attorneys can convince the courts to set aside evidence if they can show that officers broke the law or violated someone’s rights while gathering that evidence.
Can someone facing drug charges assert that officers violated their rights by physically searching them?
The law limits bodily searches
It is very easy for police officers acting as agents of the state to abuse their authority. They could camp out in neighborhoods where the average income is low or where the majority of residents belong to certain racial groups. They might then harass and intimidate individuals by conducting unnecessary, invasive and embarrassing searches.
The Supreme Court has ruled on this issue. State lawmakers have also adopted statutes that align with the court ruling. Essentially, there are limited scenarios in which a stop-and-frisk encounter is lawful.
Typically, officers cannot search someone just because they suspect that they might possess drugs. Instead, they can only physically search a person’s body when they suspect that that person may have a dangerous weapon.
Otherwise, they need the consent of the individual to conduct the search. Officers may ask if they can check the person and legitimize an otherwise illegal search. It is also legal for police officers to physically search people after arresting them.
Those facing drug charges may need to explore whether police officers may have violated their rights. Developing a thorough strategy can help people avoid criminal convictions in some cases.