Midterm Study Guide
Midterm Study Guide CJ 461
Popular in Criminal Law II
Popular in Criminal Justice
This 43 page Study Guide was uploaded by Alyssa Hendrixson on Friday October 23, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to CJ 461 at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa taught by Daniel Clay in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 279 views. For similar materials see Criminal Law II in Criminal Justice at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa.
Reviews for Midterm Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/23/15
Tinker Case Study Caption and Citation 0 Title of document 0 Opposing parties Facts 0 Starts at Opinions 0 High school students wore black arm bands to school to support the Vietnam war 0 Students got suspended until agreed to take bands off Procedural History 0 District Court 0 Appellate Court 0 Supreme Court Issue 0 Freedom of speech Holding 0 Yes 1st and 14th Amendments Reasoning o No disruption 0 Students have right to symbolic speech Rule 0 Schools can t take away students right unless a disturbance occurs Concurrences amp Dissents 0 Agree with rule but for different reasons Students don t have same rights as adults and don t fully understand them Symbolic speech is not as clear as pure speech 0 Disagree with ruling Gives students too much freedom Law Systems 0 Common Law System 0 Stare Decisis o Precedent 2 types 0 Binding 0 Courts must follow rule of higher court Persuasive 0 Can follow higher court rule but don t have to Adversary law 0 System is based on trial by combat 2 people ghtbattle in court 0 Critique Betterbest case vs betterbest lawyer o Federalism Shared powers Federal and State System 0 Dual sovereignty Double jeopardy Federal System 0 Original jurisdiction District Court is 1st in line to take a case 0 Circuit Court of Appeals Has to accept all properly led appeals Appellate court 0 Must show procedural error 12 courts of appeal nationwide Territories are treated like states 0 Supreme Court Writ of Cert Can deny any appeal they want 0 If denied Court of Appeals has nal decision Can be overturned Overturn itself ConstitutionalAmendment Other ways to get to Supreme Court 0 State Supreme Court 0 Original Jurisdiction O 0 State System 0 AL DistrictCircuit Court Court of CriminalCivil Appeal 0 Due to death penalty Supreme Court District Court Superior Court Court of Appeals Supreme Judicial Court CircuitSuperior Court Supreme Court Supreme Court Appellate Division of Supreme Court Court of Appeals District Court Court of Appeals Supreme Court of Criminal Appeals Supreme Court 4th Amendment Violations 91 0 When you conduct a search what are you looking for o nstrumentaities of the crime Whatever you use to commit the crime 0 Gun computer server etc Fruits of the crime Reason you committed the crime 0 Money jewelry etc o Contraband Can overlap with fruits of the crime Stuff that is illegal for the sake of being illegal 0 Drugs pornography etc 0 Evidence of criminal activity Ledger etc o lncriminating statements Interrogations tapping phones etc o The Warrant Clause 0 quotno warrant shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or af rmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seizedquot 0 Was it lawful O De ning a Search The Reasonable Expectation of Privacy 93 0 History of the expectation o Boyd v US Property righttrespass approach 0 Olmstead v US Warrantless wiretap of an of ce Did not involve a quotphysical objectquot Trespass required tangibility Protected places not people 0 The New Approach 0 Katz v US 1967 Phone booth was wiretapped and microphones put outside of phone in booth Overheard Katz talking about illegal gambling Ruling Warrant is required to hear phone conversations There is a reasonable expectation of privacy once the door of the booth closes Wiretapping counts as a search on a phone booth 0 Test of a search Katz Test AKA quotthe expectation of privacyquot test Subjective expectation of privacy 0 Individual manifestation Objective expectation of privacy 0 Society accepts it s as reasonable Protects people not places 0 Applying Katz Pen Registers List of numbers to call 0 LE cell phone records Violates subjective expectation of privacy Bank Records 0 Financial statements 0 Being held by a third party Violates subjective expectation of privacy Emails 0 Third party involved Violates objective expectation of privacy InformantsConversations o In real time you have an expectation of privacy 0 Once conversation is over expectation is not reliable on other party 0 Private parties can do what they want and search becomes legal Plain View 0 Legally situated and probable cause 0 Example Weed is in clear view of police officer Violates subjective expectation of privacy Open Fields land 0 Commercial v private v public property 0 Private property Highest expectation of privacy 0 Public property Little expectation of privacy 0 Usually only on person 0 Commercial Open to public 0 No expectation of privacy Need a warrant for parts for employees only Curtilage 0 Living area of home Distance 0 How close it the area to actual home Enclosure 0 Have you put up something to make the space enclosed Function 0 How often is the property used Protection 0 What have you done to protect your property Aerial Surveillance Below legal height 0 No privacy 0 Subjective expectation of privacy 0 Plain view 0 Above legal height 0 There is an expectation of privacy 0 Abandoned property California v Greenwood 1988 0 Put trash on curb and police went through it o No subjective expectation of privacy 0 New Technology Kyllo v US 2001 0 Used infrared inside house to nd pot growing inside house 0 Was a search 0 There was a subjective expectation of privacy 0 Public did not have access to technology 0 Ruling would have changed if technology was commonly used US v Jones 2012 0 GPS was put on car Violates subjective expectation of privacy 0 Court said it was a legal search of the car The Search Warrant Privacy Meets Probable Cause 0 The Importance of A Warrant 0 Searches without a warrant are de facto unreasonable Searches without warrant are presumed iega Several exceptions do apply 0 Prefer warrant because of a neutral and detached decision maker judge or magistrate Law enforcement cannot issue the warrant o Invested in the investigation 0 Separation of Powers When do judges cross the line 0 Warrant issues upon a nding of probable cause Obtaining A Warrant o quotNo warrants shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation 0 Police officer les application with the court Notes the basis for the search The alleged offense being investigated The facts giving rise to the search af davit o Signed under the quotpains and penalties of perjuryquot OathAf rmation o The Warrant o judge issues if there is probable cause But must meetlist the following requirements Propertyperson subject to search The particularity of the location to be searched O 0 Does not have to be perfect 0 Locate the premise and not reasonably mistake it for another Particularity of things the be seized No general warrants Very speci c almost a checklist Must not be quotstalequot Generally 2 weeks Time of Day 0 Normally during the day but for good cause Scope of search Reasonably open things 0 Time spent on premises Special requirement for warrants Electronic surveillance TerrorismPhone tapping FISA Courts 0 Execution of the Warrant O O Knock and announce requirement Trace routes to 16005 England Gives occupant a chance to open up before door is destroyed Rationale for the rule Reduces violence Ensures privacy Avoids destruction of property Exceptions of the rule Threat of physical violence quotHot pursuitquot Destruction of evidence Waittime depends on circumstances Reasonableness In some circumstances police may detain people on the premises while searching Use of force must be quotobjectively reasonablequot 0 What are officers looking for 0 Gun vs handcuffs vs mere presence Goals Officer s safety 0 Preventing ight Getting the detainee s assistances Knock and announce not grounds to suppress normally Must provide court a return Warrantless Searches Criminal Investigations 0 Search incident to arrest 0 No warrant is needed because it is reasonable to search without a warrant for 3 reasons Safety of the officer Prevent resisting arrest Safety of evidence 0 But how far can an officer go in conducting a search incident to arrest Chimel v California 1969 0 Robbery suspect arrested in his own home police asked consent to execute a search without a warrant When denied consent police searched home anyway 0 Scope of search must be in the quotgrabble arearquot Remember the justi cations for this exception What about cell phones 0 Search must be contemporaneous to the arrest Preston v United States Can be at the place of arrest or upon arrival at place of detention o How does this apply to the passenger compartment of automobiles Arizona v Gant 2009 0 Officers received anonymous tip about drugs being sold Pulled over suspect and arrested him for driving with a suspended license 0 Car is searched including passenger compartment 0 No search incident to arrest needed a warrant to search Encourages officers to keep suspect by car in order to be able to search car egay without a warrant or probable cause 0 May not search the passenger compartment after an arrest if person is secure and quotout of reachquot 0 SIA does not matter if the underlying offense is a felony or a misdemeanor o What about traffic ticketscitations Knowles v Iowa 1986 0 Gets pulled over police have choice to make an arrest for give ticket 0 Officer gives ticket then searches car for SIA Court said that a ticket is not an arrest so there was no reason to search the car 0 May not SIA for mere citationtraffic ticket Through in Knowles it could have changed if the officer elected to arrest instead of ticket 0 Can the police pull someone over for an arrestable offense felony or misdemeanor merely as a pretext for a search US v When 1996 0 Reason to get pulled over and arrested 0 Pretext stops are completely lawful We really do not care about the motivation of law enforcement so long as the operate in the bonds of the law Warrantiess Searches Criminal Investigations Continued 0 Consent searches 0 No legal basis needed 0 The Schneckloth Test Voluntariness No duress or coercion express or implied Totality of the Circumstance Similar to the probable Cause determination Prosecution bears the burden No one single factor is determinative Voluntariness Factors 0 Coercive police procedures Police to suspect ratio Psychological pressure Threats to obtain a warrant False claims of a warrant 0 Number of requests made 0 Custody at time of consent 0 Aware of right to refuse Not that big of factor 0 Written consent 0 Miranda warnings Goes both ways 0 Location of contraband o Unequivocal and Specific A nod or gesture may not be enough 0 Mental disability 0 Experience with the criminal justice system Lawyers and felons are screwed o Are knock and talk searches permissible Scope of consent search 0 Judged by an objectively reasonable standard What would a reasonable person believe they were consenting to Can you limit where police are allowed to go in your house 0 Yes 0 What happens if the search if beyond the scope o Consent can be withdrawn any time before or during Must be clear unambiguous and unequivocal The search must cease Third Party Consent 0 An individual may validly consent who possesses common authority over the premises to be searched Actual authority or reasonable reliance Some states do not like the reasonable reliance doctrine o What is common authority A shared apartment by roommates Yes but not anything that belongs to you room dresser etc Husband and wife 0 Yes Parent and child o If you are under the age of 18 you cannot consent to a search of your parents home 0 Parents have common authority of everything if child is under age of 18 Motel clerk No Landlord No Employer 0 Yes unless there is an extra step of privacy ie locked desk Valets Yes PC Search of Cars 0 No warrant needed to search vehicles Must still have probable cayuse 0 Have an expectation of privacy in vehicle The expectation is significantly reduced 0 Regulation 0 Logistics No reasonable to get warrant its mobile How about a motor home 0 California v Carney 0 Does it matter Consent Search Incident to arrest Containers in cars 0 Probable cause is limited to the container May only search the container not the car The backpack example Is this realistic o Probable cause to search vehicle May search containers in the car that could hide the contraband lf container is outside vehicle may not search 0 Absent individualized pc lnventory Searches 0 Police do not need a warrant when seizing a vehicle to search it if The search does not designed to further a criminal investigation The search occurs as soon as reasonable This is a standardized and responsible procedure in place 0 Uniform application 0 Applies to bags containers etc o Inevitable Discovery Rule Fixes SlA Terry Stops and Reasonable Suspicion Search and seizure of the person 0 A 4th amendment seizure occurs when an officer detains a person and restricts his or her freedom of movement 0 The greater the intrusion the higher the standard of justification required Terry stop 0 Brief investigative stop Reasonable suspicion Protective frisk for weapons only Arrest Being taken into custody Probable cause Search incident to arrest Encounter Completely voluntary free to leave 0 The test for a seizure o A seizure is based on the totality of the circumstances Similar to probable cause or consent determinations 0 Two forms of seizures Physical Physically hold or restrain a person from leaving Show of authority A demonstration of authority ie halt a weapon etc that would lead a reasonable person to believe they are not free toleave 0 Factory Sweep case Two police officers stood outside factory and asked for workers paperwork Kept illegal immigrants away No seizure occurred freedom of movement was not restricted 0 Bus Sweep case Two police officers stopped a bus Asked man to go through his bag One officer had a weapon but it was holstered No seizure occurred 0 Vehicle surveillance Guy sees undercover cop car No seizure occurred 0 California v Hodari 1999 Car full of kids fled from police and ended in a police chase Throw out a rock of crack cocaine During the chase there was no seizure Terry stopsstop and Frisk o In some circumstances may be appropriate to seize someone absent probable cause to investigate Balances individual freedom vs need for swift action 0 Requires Reasonable Suspicion Based on the facts known would a reasonable man believe that the action taken was appropriate Must be articulable suspicion not just a hunch objective Must be a particularized suspicion Judged under the totality of circumstances 0 Probabilities not certainties Reasonable suspicion o What constitutes reasonable suspicion Criminal activity Time Loca on Criminal record Evasion Noncooperation remember encounters Demeanor ie nervousness Experience with the area individualizes and crimes lnformants Consider the same factors as before Profiling Racial profiling is okay in some circumstances 0 As long as it is one factor of many 0 Terry v Ohio 1968 Reasonable suspicion Must have reasonable suspicion to pat down if they might have a weapon 0 Illinois v Wardlow 2000 Suspect flees from cops in high crime area with a backpack Officers did have reasonable suspicion because he ran 0 United States v Weaver 1992 Suspect arrives at airport from Loa Angeles and rapidly walks to a cab Police ask for plane ticket claims he left it on the plane Rejected a search Police say they will obtain a warrant continue to ask for consent to search Suspect still did not give consent Scope and Duration of Terry Stops Purpose and challenges 0 Terry stop is a limited intrusion to investigate and detect crime Must be temporary and no longer than necessary to effectuate a stop 0 As such Terry stops may be unlawful if suspect is treated in a manner consistent with probable cause arrest If so seizure is unreasonable and evidence is excluded 0 Challenging the Terry stop Movement 0 Only modest movement of a suspect is permissible to 0 Protect the public 0 Protect the suspect 0 Protect the police Totality of the circumstances 0 Generally unlawful to move a suspect to a police dominated location or police headquarters 0 Florida v Royer 0 Miami airport 0 Gained consent for search o Moved to office 40 feet away too much movement for a Terry stop 0 Drugs get thrown out as evidence 0 Dunway v New York 0 Picked up by police for suspected robbery o No probable cause for arrest but read Miranda rights and taken to headquarters o Confessed to crime at headquarters o Confession thrown out Kuapp v Texas 0 15 year old girl found stabbed to death 0 Halfbrother admitted to crime 0 Took brother from home to murder site to police station 0 Admitted to being there but not committing the crime Length of detention Lengthy Terry stop detentions that are characteristic of probable cause arrest are unreasonable United States v Sharpe o Pulled over and detained for drugs 0 Detained for 40 minutes before arrest 0 Detention was too long and unreasonable United States v Place 0 Stopped in line at Miami Airport 0 Addresses on tags on bags were false 0 Bags taken to get sniffed by drug dog 0 Held for 90 minutes before bags were sniffed 0 Police knew that he was going to be in airport so they should have had the dog waiting 0 United States v Montoya de Hernandez 0 Suspect suspected of smuggling cocaine 0 Held for 16 hours and full rectal exam 0 XRay found balloons filled with cocaine O Told police she was pregnant so she denied consent to XRay 88 balloons with over one pound of cocaine was passed over 3 days at the hospital 0 Test Totality of the Circumstances 0 Some have called for a 20 minute max lntrusivenessTechniques employed 0 Are the techniques employed by police too intrusive than reasonable under the circumstances 0 Must be the least intrusive mens reasonably available to verify or dispel the officer s suspicion in a short period of time 0 Factors considered 0 O O O The number of officers and suspects The nature of the crime Whether there is reason to believe the suspect us armed The need for immediate action for protection Threatening behavior by the suspect The opportunity to make it lessintrusive Florida v Royer Could have used a dog 0 State of Minnesota v Munson O O Pulled over with arms drawn Arrest them until search was over for drugs 0 United States v Gallegos O O O Transported suspect to scene Did he do it yes or no Movement necessary to further investigation 0 United States v Lopez Arias O Moved suspect for safety concern 0 Park V Shiflett O Husband and wife go to grocery store triggered alarm store was closed but door was unlocked and lights were on o Hiibel v 6th Judicial District 2004 0 Police may ask to see your lD Automobiles and Terry Stops During a traffic stop may conduct a Terrytype investigation so long as it does not unreasonably extend the stop May order the driver or passengers out of the vehicle without the requirements of reasonable suspicion Generally promoting officer safety 0 0 Some states such as Massachusetts have different rules Must have a reasonable belief that safety is in danger in order to issue an exit order Frisks 0 May conduct a frisk when nothing in the initial encounter serves to dispel an officer s reasonable fear for his safety or the safety of others Under the circumstances would a reasonable person believe their safety was at risk 0 Suspect must be given an opportunity to dispel fears 0 Relevant factors Bulges in pockets Furtive gestures Suspect s past Suspected criminal activity High crime area particularly at night Presence of others Introduction to Interrogation 0 Importance 0 Many criminal cases can only be solved through confessions o Jurors place a significant role on confessions Defense attorneys will fight like hell to have them excluded Cannot unring bell 0 Because of its importance often is subjected to abuse 0 False confessions The Central Park Five 0 5 kids walking in Central Park at night 0 Woman gets raped kids are arrested for it o All confessed all convicted All five are actually innocent The Boston Case Ongoing Halloween night gang decides to get 2 hookers Push one against the wall claim they are cops and rob her 0 Other one ran they ran after her Raped her in a cornfield and stabbed her 0 720 stab wounds 0 Rival gang tipped police 0 12 year old member confesses all end up confessing False confessions 0 Types Voluntary 0 Coercion Compliant When police promise thingsmake deals lnternalized Convince themselves that they did the crime 0 Factors leading to false confession Police bias Age Intelligence Misleading remarks and false evidence Lengthy interviews Interrogation techniques 0 The Reid Technique 0 How to elicit a confession from anyone 0 Biggest factor of false confessions o Psychologicalmanipulation 0 False confession vs Involuntary Confessions ConstitutionalProtections 0 14th Amendment Due Process Clause Involuntary confession is a violation 0 5th Amendment selfincrimination Accusatorial v inquisitorial system Miranda v Arizona 0 Reading of rights prevent involuntariness on occasion 0 6th Amendment right to counsel Attaches when takes formals steps to prosecution Due process and voluntariness o Requires confessions to be voluntary Beecher v Alabama Brown v Mississippi Ashcraft v Tennessee 0 Four purposes of voluntariness Trustworthiness Fundamental fairness Offensive police methods Free will and rational choice 0 Confession must be made freely voluntary and without compulsion or inducement of any sort Admissibility of confessions o A confession violates the due process clause if The defendant is subject to physical or psychological coercion AND The coercion overcomes the will of the individual to resist 0 Based on the totality of the circumstances Physical abuse Psychological abuse and manipulation Factors surrounding the interrogation Attorney Defendant s demographics Procedural regularity Miranda warnings Necessity Development of due process rules 0 Mincey v Arizona 0 Arizona v Fulminate 0 Colorado v Connelly o The McNabbMallory Ryle NcNabb v United States Mallory v United States Focused on time between arrest and initial appearance 0 Changed in 1968 with Omnibus Act 0 Provided a 6 hour rule Modern day time is just one factor considered 0 Selflncrimination 0 Protection extends to testimonial evidence not nontestimonial evidence 0 Must be a substantial and real threat the information may lead to criminal charges or Pennsylvania v Muniz a link in a chain of evidence 0 Pennsylvania v Muniz Selfincrimination based on answering police s questions 0 Not incriminating by slurring his speech telling that he was drunk 0 Schumer v California Gave blood is selfincrimination Drove drunk and car slid off of the road 0 Miranda v Arizona 1966 o Invoking Miranda Generally must be unambiguous police are not mind readers David v United States 0 Have to be clear when asking for a lawyer Hart v AG Wanting an attorney has to be voluntary Fare v Michael C Asked to speak to probation officer not an attorney and was denied Berghuis v Tompkins Stayed silent through 2 12 hours of questioning but failed to say that he was invoking the right to remain silent o Waiving Miranda Totality of the circumstances 0 Voluntary o Offender 0 Conditions of interrogation o Interrogation techniques 0 Motivation 0 Knowing 0 Intelligent Express v Implied waivers 0 North Carolina v Butler Question first read later 0 Elstad v Oregon o Is the reading really effective Waiver following invocation of Miranda 0 Questioning o 4 factors of Scrupulously Honored Immediate cessation of questioning Suspended for a significant period Fresh set of Miranda warnings Questioning on crime different in time place and nature 0 Attorney 0 Much more strict o The Initiation Test Can reinvoke Miranda at ANY time In evidence the public safety exception is a rule to the Miranda rule Allows into evidence an otherwise suppressible statement made by a defendant NY v Quarels 0 After receiving the description of Quarels an alleged assailant a police officer entered a supermarket spotted him and ordered him to stop 0 Quarels was frisked 0 Upon detecting an empty shoulder holster the officer asked Quarels where his gun was 0 The officer found the gun in a nearby crate o The officer then formally arrested Qaurels and read him his Miranda rights Opinions o The court held that there is a public safety exception to the require that officers issue Miranda warnings to suspects 0 Since the police officer s request for the location of the gym was prompted by an immediate interest in assuring that it did not injure an innocent bystander or fall into the hands of a potential accomplice to Quarels his failure to read the Miranda warning did not violate the constitution Boston Marathon bombings o Tamerlan Tsarnaev Killed in a police shoot out ten was dragged under the get away SUV for 20 feet by his brother 0 Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Guilty of 30 charges lssued death penalty in June Trying to get a retrial based on tainted injury 0 Miranda rights Should Tsarnaev been read his rights 0 He was a naturalized US citizen 0 Had no weapon on him at the time 0 Court Decided there were 2 types of questions in this situation 0 Questions are necessary to resolve the danger to the public 0 Questions or the purpose of extracting incriminating evidence Justice for Tsarnaev Make sure there were no other accomplices Make sure there was no foreign connection 0 Make sure there is no other plan of attack Voluntariness and False Confession Terry v Ohio 0 Terry and 2 other men were observed by a plain clothes policeman in what the officer believed to be a casing a job a stickup o The officer stopped and frisked the three men and found a weapon on two of them 0 Terry was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon and sentenced to three years in jail 0 Question Was the search and seizure of Terry and the other men in violation of the 4th Amendment 0 The court held that the search was reasonable and the weapons seized could be used as evidence 0 Illinois v Wardlow O O 0 Sam Wardlow who was holding an opaque bag inexplicably fled an area of Chicago known for heavy narcotics trafficking after noticing police officers in the area When officers caught up with him on the street one stopped him and conducted a protective patdown search for weapons because in his experience there were usually weapons in the vicinity of narcotics transactions The officers arrested Wardlow after discovering that he was carrying a handgun Question Is a person s sudden and unprovoked flight form identifiable police officers sufficiently suspicious to justify the officer s stop of that person 0 Yes Police did not violate the 4th Amendment when they stopped Wardlow Nervous evasive behavior is a pertinent factor in determining reasonable suspicion 0 Arizona v US 0 0 An April 23rd 2010 the Arizona State Legislature passed SB 1070 The US sought to stop the enforcement of SB 1070 in federal district before the law could take effect Provisions Created a statelaw crime for being unlawfully present in the US Created a statelaw crime for working or seeking work while not authorized to do so Required state and local officers to verify the citizenship or alien status of anyone who was lawfully arrested or detained Authorized warrantless arrests of aliens believed to be removable from the US Question Do the federal immigration laws preclude Arizona s efforts at cooperative law enforcement and preempt the four provisions of SB 1070 on their face 0 Yes for provision 1 2 and 4 o No for provision 3 0 US v Weaver 0 Prosecutor s office and several police officers were executing a state search warrant for illegal drugs in a private residence Phone rang during the search and the officer answered The man on the phone asked if Bolinger officer had his stuff and his tool Man showed up and then ran The officer chased after him and arrested him for assault 0 Found a revolver on him and charged him with unlawful possession 0 Man argues that the police had no reasonable suspicion to search him 0 Question Was the charge of unlawful weapon violating Weaver s 4th Amendment right 0 No The court found that the arrest was lawful because he assaulted an officer and the weapon was admissible as evidence 0 The officers had reason to issue an investigatory stop because of reasonable suspicion without having located the controlled substance first 0 Hiibel v Sixth Judicial District 0 Larry Hiibel was arrested and convicted Nevada failing to identify himself to a police officer who was investigating an assault 0 Nevada and many other states has a law that requires a person to tell an officer his name if asked 0 Hiibel challenged the conviction claiming it violated his 5th Amendment right not to incriminate himself and his 4th Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches 0 Question Did Hiibel s arrest and conviction for not telling a police officer his name violate his 4th and 5th Amendment 0 No The court ruled that the search did not violate his 4th Amendment right because it was based on reasonable suspicion and it was minimally obtrusive question 0 Also did not violate his 5th Amendment because Hiibel did not argue that it would incriminate him of any crime The Exclusionary Rule 0 The Exclusionary Rule 0 Evidence obtained in violation of one s constitutional rights is inadmissible TP ESTABLISH GUILTY Included fruit of the poisonous tree derivative evidence Once illegal always illegal o The Silver Platter Doctrine State violation resulting in federal prosecution o Mapp v Ohio 1961 0 Supreme Court stated police executed illegal search because they had no warrant 0 Let woman go even though undeniably guilty evidence became inadmissible 0 14th Amendment Debating the Exclusionary Rule 0 Why do we exclude evidence in violation of constitutional rights Importance of rights Deterrence Judicial integrity 0 What are the costs of exclusion O To the state Loses authority power and control To victims 0 Can be a slap in the face To truth seeking Unfair to the truth if some evidence is allowed and some is not Any other viable options Remedies are not always realistic Civil case sue Standing to Challenge Evidence 0 0 Having authority to challenge evidence Alderman v United States 1969 Introduction to standing Rakas v Illinois 1978 Automobile exclusions Minnesota v Olson 1990 Overnight guests Expectation of privacy 0 Rights were violated so you can sue Rawlings v Kentucky 1980 Possessory interest in items seized There is standing for exclusion of evidence Minnesota v Carter 1998 Commercial transactions Drug deal at a house police busted the house Illegally searched house Court ruled that they couldn t challenge evidence but homeowners could owner s rights were violated No expectation of privacy if just visiting house 0 Cannot use evidence against homeowners United States v Payner 1980 The target of a police investigation Tax fraud went through briefcase Case stolen by private investigator Police are more interested in whom the briefcase belongs to than the man who stole it Exclusionary Rule does not apply Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule 0 Collateral Proceeding I Bail Pretrial hearing Sentencing Everything but actual trial 0 Attenuation Removing the Taint United States v Boone Court allowed evidence in Illegally pulled over for narcotics Drove away and started to throw the drugs out of the window in front of police Very important in fruit of the poisonous tree arguments Factors Temporal proximity lntervening circumstances Intentional violation Constitutional interest protected 0 Hudson v Michigan Not going to throw out evidence because police made a mistake 0 Didn t wait long enough and didn t knock Testimony v Physical Evidence 0 Physical evidence is more protected 0 Exclude physical as much as possible when obtained illegally 0 Good Faith Exception Requires an honest and objectively reasonable belief in the legality of a search Ways to establish Good Faith Reliance on a warrant o Unites States v Leon 1984 Reliance on assurance by the judge 0 Mass v Sheppard 1984 Reliance on legislation 0 Illinois v Krull 1987 Reliance on data form court employee 0 Arizona v Evans 1995 Reliance on apparent third party consent 0 Illinois v Rodriguez 1990 Reliance on a precedent that is overturned 0 Davis v United States 2011 Herring v United States 2009 0 police officer nonintentionally violated the law 0 relied in court evidence court clerk 0 Independent Source Doctrine Could have gotten same information from source without violating rights 0 Inevitable Discovery Rule This is why police impound vehicles Nix v Williams 1984 o Impeachment evidence during trial Pornography example Walder v United States Can include inconsistent nonmirandized statements 0 Harris v New York Goal is to prevent perjury Given with a limiting instruction Juries do not listen to limitations cannot unring a bell Chapter 1 Vocabulary Appellate 0 Party appealing AppeHee 0 Party against whom an appeal is led Bench Trial 0 A trial in which a judge sits without a jury Binding Authority 0 A decision that establishes a precedent Brief 0 A written legal argument submitted to an appellate court 0 To write a summary of a case Certiorari o A decision to hear an appeal Collateral Attack 0 A constitutional challenge by an individual who has been convicted and incarcerated and has exhausted hisher state appeaB Common Law 0 judgemade law brought from England to the United States Concurrent Jurisdiction 0 Joint authority of federal and state courts over certain areas of crime Concurring Opinion 0 An opinion by a judge supporting a majority or dissenting opinion typically based on other grounds Contextualism o A broad approach to interpreting constitutional texts that focuses on interpreting the document in light of current developments Courts of General jurisdiction 0 Courts that hear more serious criminal and civil cases Courts of Limited jurisdiction o Courts with jurisdiction over a narrow range of cases Courts of Original Jurisdiction o Courts with jurisdiction over a broad range of cases Discretion o The exercise ofjudgement by a decision maker in the criminal justice system Discretionary Appeal 0 An appeal that an appellate court may review or decline to review at its discretion Dissenting Opinion 0 An opinion by a judge disagreeing with the majority ofjudges En Banc o The entire court Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 0 Details rules for criminal procedure drafted by federal judges and approved by Congress First Impression 0 An issue that has never before been decided by a court Gerstein Hearing 0 Hearing to determine whether police possessed probable cause for an arrest Indictment 0 An accusation of criminal activity returned by a grand jury Information 0 A document signed by a prosecutor charging an individual with a crime Intermediate Appellate Courts 0 Courts between municipal and supreme courts judicial Activism o The philosophy that courts should play a role in creating social policy judicial Restraint o The philosophy that elected officials rather than courts should make social policy Magistrate 0 A lawyer who serves and 8 year term in the US district court to issue search warrants conduct preliminary hearings and rule on pretrial motions Majority Opinion 0 The decision of the majority of the judges on a court Misdemeanor o A crime carrying a criminal penalty of less than one year in pdson Original jurisdiction o The rst court to hear a case Originalist o A judge who follows intent of the framers of the US Constitution Per Curium Opinion 0 An opinion of an entire court without any single judge being identi ed as the author Persuasive Authority 0 A decision that does not constitute a binding authority but that a court may consult to assist in making a judgement Petitioner 0 An individual ling a collateral attack on a verdict following the exhaustion of direct appeals Plurality Opinion 0 A judicial opinion that represents the views of the largest number of judges on a court although short of a majority Precedent o A judicial opinion that controls the decisions of a court presented with the same issue Respondent 0 An individual against whom a collateral attack is directed Rule of Four 0 Four Supreme Court judges are required to vote to hear a case Stare Decisis o The practice of following the precedent set by previous court decisions Trail de novo o A new trial before a different court Reading and Brie ng Vocabulary Appellate Courts 0 Courts of appeals Headnotes 0 Short statements of the important points included in a legal document Holding 0 The conclusions reached by a judge in a case Legal Reporter 0 Book containing the written opinions of judges Obiter Dicta 0 Observations from the bench Reasoning 0 An explanation of a judge s thinking in reaching a decision Socratic Method 0 Use of question and answer technique in teaching Chapter 2 Vocabulary Bill of Rights 0 First ten amendments to the US Constitution Constitutional Political System 0 Political system in which the powers of the various branches of government are de ned by the constitution o The rights and liberties of the people are stated in the Bill of Rights Constitutionalization 0 Extension of the rights and freedoms in the Bill of Rights relevant to criminal procedure to the fty states Due Process Clause 0 5th and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution guarantee individuals due process of law 0 14th Amendment clause incorporates most of the protections of the Bill of Rights Fourteenth Amendment 0 Passed in 1868 in order to provide equal rights and opportunity to newly free African American slaves Fundamental Fairness o The 14th Amendment Due Process Clause prohibits states from criminal procedures that are fundamentally unfair 0 States are otherwise free to structure their criminal justice systems Judicial Review 0 The US Supreme Court reviews the decisions of the legislative and executive branches of government to determine whether they are consistent with the US Constitution 0 The court is the quotfinal arbiterquot of the meaning of the constitution NewJudicial Federalism 0 State supreme courts interpreting state court constitutions often provide defendants with more rights than have been required by the US Supreme Court interpreting a similar clause in the US Constitution Presumption of Regularity o A court s assumption that criminal justice decision makers acted in good faith rather than out of a discriminatory intent Retroactivity ofJudicial Decisions 0 Principle that a US Supreme Court judgement should be retroactively applied to all cases that are yet to be led and cases that have already been led Selective Incorporation 0 14th Amendment Due Process Clause incorporates only selected provisions of the Bill of Rights Selective Incorporation Plus 0 14th Amendment Due Process Clause incorporates selected provisions of the Bill of Rights along with other rights Selective Prosecution o Prosecution in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments which protect individuals from prosecution because of their race gender or the exercise of their fundamental rights Supervisory Authority 0 The Supreme Court has the authority to direct lower courts federal level to follow rules that are not based on the US Constitution Supremacy Clause 0 Article VI Section 2 of the US Constitution provides that the constitution the laws of the United States and treaties shall be the quotsupreme Law of the Landquot 0 This gives the federal government priority over the state government when there is a con ict between federal and state laws Total Incorporation o Entire Bill of Rights is incorporated into the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause Total Incorporation Plus o Entire Bill of Rights along with other rights not contained in the Bill of Rights are incorporated into the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause Chapter 3 Vocabulary Abandoned Property 0 Property intentionally discarded by the owner Curtilage o The area immediately surrounding the home considered part of the home Encounters o Informal police stops of individuals Expectation of Privacy 0 Protection from government intrusion 0 Areas with a high expectation of privacy may generally not be searched without a warrant General Warrants o Warrants allowing colonial authorities to search anytime and anywhere Open Fields 0 Areas distant from the home that lacks an expectation of privacy Physical Seizure 0 An act in which a law enforcement officer takes hold of a suspect with the intent to prevent the individual from leaving Plain View 0 An exception to the 4th Amendment warrant requirement that allows a police officer to seize an item without a search warrant when 1 the officer is lawfully positioned and 2 there is probable cause to seize the object Property Rights Approach 0 An approach to 4th Amendment protection that assumes such protection is limited to physical intrusions of the home 0 Comparable to trespassory approach Search 0 Government intrusion on an individual s expectation of privacy Seizure o A reasonable person would not believe himself or herself to be free to leave or to otherwise terminate the encounter Show of Authority Seizure o Demonstration of authority by law enforcement officers in which they direct a suspect to halt display his or her weapons block the suspect movement or otherwise conduct themselves in a manner that would result in a reasonable person not feeling free to leave or otherwise terminate the encounter o The suspect must actually submit to the demonstration of authorty Trespassory Approach 0 Approach to 4th Amendment protection that assumes such protection is limited to physical intrusions of the home 0 Comparable to property rights approach Writs of Assistance 0 Documents used by 18th Century American colonial authorities to compel individuals to assist in carrying out a search Chapter 4 Vocabulary 0 Anonymous Tip 0 Information from an unidenti ed informant Articulable Suspicion o A police of cer in justifying an intrusion must present speci c and articulable facts that together with rational inferences drawn from those facts reasonably suggest that an individual has committed a crime or is about to commit a crime CaseByCase Determination o The facts of each situation are evaluated to determine whether a police of cer s conduct meets the applicable legal standard 0 An example is the standard for a reasonable suspicion stop in accordance with Terry v Ohio 0 Drug Courier Pro le 0 A pro le developed based on experience that isolated characteristics of a drug traf cker o Frisk o A police of cer may pat down a suspect s outer clothing 0 Informant 0 An individual who provides information about criminal activity to law enforcement o PlainFeel Doctrine o A police of cer who pats down a suspect s outer clothing and feels an object whose contour or mass makes its identity immediately apparent may lawfully seize the item Racial Pro ling o Stopping or arresting individuals because of their race ethnicity religion or other characteristic rather than because of their actions Reasonable Suspicion o A police of cer may undertake an investigative stop of a suspect where he or she has an objective factual basis that quotcrime is afootquot the suspect has engaged in or about to engage in criminal activity 0 This determination is based on the totality of the circumstances and no single fact may be determinative 0 Facts to consider include the suspect s actions nervousness and evasiveness frequency and type of criminal activity in the area time of day and the of cer s prior knowledge of the suspect Stop and Frisk o The police may stop an individual in those instances in which they have a reasonable basis to believe that crime may be afoot o The police may conduct a frisk for weapons were the individual fails to dispel the of cer s fear that the individual is armed and presently dangerous StopAndldentify Statutes 0 State laws that authorize the police to require a citizen subjected to a stop and frisk to present identi cation Chapter 5 Vocabulary o Affiant 0 Individual who swears to a warrant Affidavit o Sworn statement setting forth facts constituting probable cause that an individual has committed a criminal offense 0 AguilarSpinelli Test o Affidavit must detail informant s credibility and basis if knowledge Arrest 0 Police custody of an individual based on probable cause that he or she has committed a crime Arrest Warrant 0 Judicial nding that there is probable cause to arrest an individual Citation 0 Notice to an individual to appear for trial at a later date 0 EmergencyAid Doctrine o Warrantless entry by the police into the home to provide assistance to an individual Exigent Circumstances 0 Emergency circumstances justifying warrantless entry into the home FleeingFelon Rule 0 Common aw doctrine that police may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon who is eeing the police Informant Privilege 0 An informant may not be required to testify Misdemeanant 0 Individual arrested for a misdemeanor PoliceCreated Exigency Doctrine 0 Police may not rely on exigent circumstances when the exigency was created or manufactured by the conduct of the police Probably Cause 0 Facts and circumstances within officers knowledge and if which they have reasonably trustworthy information that would warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense has been or being committed Chapter 6 Vocabulary 0 Automobile Exception 0 Exception to requirement that police obtain a warrant before conducting a search 0 A warrant is not required for an automobile BrightLine Rule 0 A clear and unambiguous rule set by judicial precedent Consent Search 0 A search based on an individual s waiver of his or her 4th Amendment rights Contemporaneous 0 With respect to searches a requirement that the search must be undertaken immediately before the arrest at the same time as the arrest or immediately after the arrest Grab Area 0 The area within a suspect s immediate control that may be searched incident to an arrest Inventory 0 An administrative procedure recording that possessions of an arrestee and the content of impounded automobiles Knock and Announce o Refers to a requirement that police knock and announce their presence when serving a search warrant Knock and Talk Searches 0 Most courts approve of these searches on the grounds that the police by knocking on an individual s door are doing no more than any citizen might do and are not violating a resident s expectation of privacy Particularity Requirement 0 Requirement that a warrant be speci c in regard to the objects to be seized and the place to be searched Pretext Arrest 0 An arrest that is motivated by the intent to investigate law violations for which no probable cause or even articulable suspicion exists Search Incident to an Arrest o A search that in authorized by the fact of an arrest 0 It includes a search of the person arrested and the area within his or her immediate control Search Warrant o Authorization from a magistrate to search for and seize speci ed objects Third Party Consent o Consent to a search provided by an individual with common authority who exercises mutual use of property has joint access or control for most purposes Chapter 7 Vocabulary Administrative Inspections 0 Government agencies conduct searches to determine whether businesses factories apartments and home are conforming to a broad range of regulations Airport Screening 0 Passengers and their bags are subjected to an examination before boarding aircraft Border Examination 0 Seizures andor searches at the US border may be undertaken without articulable suspicion Closely Regulated Business 0 A warrantless probable cause search is permitted for a heavily regulated business Modi ed Probable Cause 0 Administrative Searches may be based on a broad probable cause standard rather than on probable cause to search a speci c structure Motor Vehicle Checkpoint o Fixed point at which motor vehicles are stopped without articulable suspicion Routine Border Searches 0 Nonintrusive searches that require reasonable suspicion SpecialNeeds Searches 0 Searches that do not serve the normal needs of law enforcement Chapter 8 Vocabulary Admissions 0 An individual admits a fact that tends to establish guilt such as his or her presence at the shooting scene 0 When combined with other facts an admission may lead to a criminal conviction Break in the Custody Rule 0 Individual who evokes right to counsel may be interrogated after 14 days Confessions 0 An individual admits the commission of a crime in response to police questioning Custodial Interrogation o Questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his or her freedom of action in any signi cant way Express Questioning o A direct question Express Waiver 0 An affirmative relinquish of a right False Confession 0 An innocent individual confesses to a crime that he or she did not commit Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Voluntariness Test 0 Confessions may not be obtained through psychological or physical coercion that overcomes to will of the individual to resist Functional Equivalent of Express Questioning 0 Words or actions on the part of the police that the police should know are reasonably likely to lead a defendant to incriminate himself or herself Fundamental Fairness 0 14th Amendment Due Process Clause prohibits states from criminal procedures that are fundamentally unfair 0 States are otherwise free to structure their criminal justice system Implied Waiver o The waiver of a right as indicated by an individual s words and actions and the totality of the circumstances lncommunicado Interrogation 0 Law enforcement questioning of individuals in the isolation of the police station Initiation o The test for waiving a prior invocation of counsel under Miranda Interrogation 0 Words or actions on the part of the police that are likely to lead a suspect to incriminate himself or herself Involuntary Confessions 0 Confessions that result from coercion drugs or a mental disability rather than free will Miranda Warnings o The police are required to inform individuals of the right to remain silent that anything they say may be used against them and of the right to an attorney retained or appointed Nontestimonial Evidence 0 Evidence that is noncommunicative in character Police Methods Test 0 Due process test intended to regulate police interrogation techniques Public Safety Exception 0 Police may ask questions reasonably prompted by a reasonable concern with public safety without rst advising a suspect of his or her Miranda rights Question First and Warn Later 0 Police may question an individual without reading Miranda obtain a confession and then read the Miranda rights and interrogate the suspect o The confession is admissible so long as the Miranda warnings function effectively to advise suspects of their rights Scrupulously Honor 0 Police may question an individual who has invoked his or her right to silence about a crime different in time nature and place after waiting a signi cant period of time and giving a fresh set of Miranda warnings Star Chamber 0 A special court that was established by the English King in the 15th Century and that was charged with prosecuting and punishing political and religious dissidents Statements 0 An oral or written declaration to the police that may constitute an assertion of innocence Testimonial Evidence 0 Evidence that is communicative in character Third Degree o The use of coercion and violence by the police to extract confessions Voluntary Knowing and Intelligent Waiver o A relinquishment of Miranda rights must be the product of a free and deliberate choice and with full awareness of the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequence of the decision to abandon it Chapter 9 Vocabulary Bertillon Method 0 Alphonse Bertillon a French police of cer pioneered the identi cation of criminals through precise physical measurements Combined DNA Index System 0 CODIS is an electronic database that integrated DNA pro les contained in the criminal offender databases of the 50 states and the federal government Corporeal Identi cation 0 Identi cation of an individual who is physically present Critical Stages of a Criminal Proceeding 0 Procedures between arraignment and trial at which a failure to provide the defendant a lawyer may prevent the defendant from obtaining a fair trial Daubert Test 0 Test for the admissibility of scienti c evidence based on the relevance and reliability of the evidence Distractors 0 Individuals in a lineup who are not suspects DNA 0 Deoxyribonucleic acid is a molecule that stores an individual s genetic code and is found in the cells of the human body DoubleBlind o The police and the witness do not know who is the suspect at a lineup or photograph parade Eyewitness Identi cation 0 Identi cation of a suspect by a victim or witness Fillers 0 Individuals in a lineup who are not suspects Foils 0 Individuals in a lineup who are not suspects Frye Test 0 Requires that a scienti c technique be suf ciently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular eld in which it belongs InCourt Identi cation o A witness identi es the perpetrator of a criminal act in court Noncorporeal Identi cation 0 Identi cation of a perpetrator of a crime who is not present by viewing photographs Photographic Displays 0 Witness identi cation of a perpetrator of a crime through the use of photographs Polygraph 0 An instrument used to determine whether a person is telling the truth Scienti c Identi cation 0 Identi cation of a suspect through scienti c procedures Sequential Presentation 0 Presentation of individuals in a lineup one after another Showup o A victim or eyewitness is confronted with a single suspect Simultaneous Lineup o A victim or eyewitness confronts all the participants in the lineup at the same time Suggestive Procedures 0 Identi cations that in uence the result by highlighting one of the participants WadeGilbert Rule 0 The suspect has a constitutional right to a lawyer at all post indictment lineups and confrontations 0 Absent the presence or waiver of a lawyer the results may not be introduced by the prosecutor at trial 0 A prosecutor may not ask a witness for an incourt identi cation unless that the incourt identi cation is not the product if a tainted identi cation procedure
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'