The 4th Amendment protects U.S. citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. If it is violated by the government, all evidence found by the illegal search and seizure must be excluded under the exclusionary rule which serves as a remedy for violations of the 4th Amendment. Before a remedy can be issued for a violation of the 4th Amendment, a court must determine whether the 4th Amendment applies to a given case. The 4th Amendment only applies when certain criteria are met. The first criterion is that the government must be involved in a search or seizure through government action. This action applies to the conduct of government officials such as police, firefighters, or individuals hired as private government actors. After the first criterion is met, the court must determine whether a search or seizure occurred. A search is defined as the physical or technological invasion of an area deemed by a majority of the court to have a reasonable expectation of privacy. These locations could be closed homes or phone booths depending on the circumstances of the incident. A seizure occurs when the government takes an individual's belongings or the individual themselves. That said, the government can still conduct searches and seizures if they follow certain steps correctly. Searches and seizures require a specific warrant written by a neutral, detached magistrate based on probable cause. This warrant requirement may be waived depending on the circumstances of the incident. Some examples of this include the automobile exception, emergencies, pre-arrest searches, and exigent circumstances. The police can also make arrests without a warrant as long as they have a plausible reason before the arrest. In this... halfway through the document... he leaves the car in places where contraband wouldn't normally be found, but it has no bearing on the discovery of the cocaine. The weapons found on the ranch are admissible because the agents had a warrant to search the ranch for drugs and weapons. The Lamborghini is not admissible because it was not covered by the warrant and the VID# was not in view of the Officer carrying out the search. The statement made about trying to find Snow White would not be admissible in court because Agent Smith arrested Doe and began asking him questions about Doe's crime before Doe was read his Miranda Rights. Finally, the statement made by Doe regarding his supplier would be admissible in court because Doe was read his Miranda rights and acknowledged his understanding of the rights and subsequently made a voluntary confession without any coercion from the officers involved.