Editing Search and seizure (section)

===Violation of the warrant requirement===
There are several areas of analysis that courts use to determine whether a search has encroached upon constitutional protections. Only those searches that meet with certainty each of the minimal measured requirements of the following four doctrines are likely to stand unchallenged in court.<ref>{{cite book |last=Whitebread |first=Charles H.|date=2000|title=Criminal Procedure: An Analysis of Cases and Concepts. / Edition 5|url= http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/criminal-procedure-charles-h-whitebread/1101184310 |location= MN |publisher= Foundation Press/ West Academic|page=1019}}</ref> Those qualifying doctrines are reasonableness,<ref>{{cite court|litigants=Regina v Smith |vol=4 |reporter=AER |opinion=289 |pinpoint= |court= |year=2000 |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldjudgmt/jd000727/smith-1.htm |quote=[sub-citing Camplin and Bedder:] the concept of the 'reasonable man' has never been more than a way of explaining the law to a jury; an anthropomorphic image to convey to them, with a suitable degree of vividness, the legal principle that even under provocation, people must conform to an objective standard of behaviour that society is entitled to expect }}</ref> probable cause,<ref>''[[Brinegar v. United States]]'', {{ussc|338|160|1949}}.</ref> judicial authority,<ref name="uscourts.gov">[http://www.uscourts.gov/forms/AO093.pdf AO 93 (Rev. 12/09) Search and Seizure Warrant] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100407223833/http://www.uscourts.gov/forms/AO093.pdf |date=April 7, 2010 }}. Uscourts.gov.</ref> and particularity.<ref>{{cite book |last=Gryzlo |first=Joseph P.|title=A Balancing Act: Fourth Amendment Protections and the Reasonable Scope of Government Investigatory Access to E-Mail Accounts |year=2016|publisher=John's L|page=495}}</ref> While police judgment just before or during the course of a search or arrest usually provides the factors that determine reasonableness, matters of probable cause, judicial authority, and particularity requirements are commonly met through police procedures that are overseen by a court judge or magistrate prior to any search or arrest being conducted. Probable cause requires an acceptable degree of justified suspicion. Particularity requirements are spelled out in the constitution text itself. Law enforcement compliance with those requirements is scrutinized prior to the issuance of a warrant being granted or denied by an officiating judicial authority.<ref name="uscourts.gov"/>

====Exclusionary rule====
The primary remedy in illegal search cases is known as the "[[exclusionary rule]]".<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Loewenthal|first1=Milton A.|title=Evaluating the Exclusionary Rule in Search and Seizure|journal=Anglo-American Law Review|date=1 October 1980|volume=9|issue=4|page=238|doi=10.1177/147377958000900403|s2cid=157351521}}</ref> This means that any evidence obtained through an illegal search is excluded and cannot be used against the defendant at his or her trial. There are some narrow exceptions to this rule.  For instance, if police officers acted in good faith—perhaps pursuant to a warrant that turned out to be invalid, but that the officers had believed valid at the time of the search—evidence may be admitted.