Reference no: EM133295402

Question: Need to give reply on each post

What constitutes unreasonable search and seizure? What is the purpose of a warrant?

A warrant is a document that is issued by a judge or justice of the peace authorizing the police to take someone into custody. There are several types of warrants. An arrest warrant serves the purpose of protecting alleged offenders from being unlawfully arrested. An arrest warrant also allows the person being arrested to be given physical notice of the arrest and notice of the charges being placed against them. An arrest warrant is not required to make an arrest. A bench warrant is a warrant issued by a judge when an accused fails to appear to court. This warrant authorizes police to arrest the alleged offender and hold them until their next court appearance. Surety warrants are issued by judges when a person helps an accused bail out of jail, and then decides they no longer want to supervise the accused.

Unreasonable search and seizure simply mean that the police cannot search your person or you're dwelling without probable cause. For example, if police want to enter and search somebody's home, they need to have a few things in place before they do that. Police need sufficient grounds meaning they need quality suspicion or proof that there is criminal activity in this dwelling, and a warrant issued by a judge (except in exigent circumstances where somebody's life may be in harm) before they can legally enter somebody's home. Unreasonable search and seizure also apply to somebody's person. Police cannot just walk up to somebody on the street and demand to search their pockets, or bag. They need to have reason that can be defended in court to search a person or dwelling.

Explain the significance of R. V. Marshall

The Marshall case was a watershed moment in affirming Indigenous rights, and Indigenous communities have grown significantly due to the decision. Similarly, the number of processing plants and other businesses in that category has grown significantly, contributing immensely to economic benefits. The R. v. Marshall Case has also significantly aided the Mi'kmaq people in reviving their traditional and sustainable harvesting, known as netukulimk. Furthermore, Indigenous workers in the fisheries industry have increased (Supreme Court of Canada, 2012). On the other hand, local communities gained equal access to commercial fisheries due to the court decision and the profitable lobster industry, including support from the federal government funding, including the oceans and Fisheries Canada. On the same note, the case contributed to the compensation of training, vessels, and licenses, in exchange for the federal government's commercial regulation on the fishery, and the Indigenous communities humbly agreed.

Furthermore, the Mi'kmaq were tied to an exclusive trade agreement with the British, and the British promised to offer the truck house to the Mi'kmaq in which they could trade on favorable terms and purchase the European products they preferred. Once they entered a peace treaty with the British and recognized the British King's sovereignty, the Mi'kmaq gained and enjoyed all rights enjoyed by the British masters in their region (Supreme Court of Canada, 2012). Most importantly, the truck house regime and exclusive trade were superseded. At the end of the regime, Mi'kmaq trade interests were still constantly protected since the provincial general laws stated that the Mi'kmaq had the freedom to conduct trading with whomever they wanted.

The case shows that the trade treaty did not permit Mi'kInaq rights. Still, it reflected a mechanism imposed on them to allow or promote peace between the British and the Mi'kmaq, as the last one, by removing the Mi'kmaq's requirement to trade with key enemies of the British or dishonest traders.