CRM210 Ch. 7&8
Popular in introduction to the american criminal justice system
Popular in Department
This 7 page Class Notes was uploaded by Tritny Tipton on Tuesday October 4, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to CRM 210 at Missouri State University taught by Patrick Gartin in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 8 views.
Reviews for CRM210 Ch. 7&8
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 10/04/16
Tuesday, September 27 th Chapter 7: Policing Legal Aspects - The Bill of Rights: The popular name given to the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which are considered especially important in the processing of criminal defendants (Landmark, precedent-setting decisions) The Fourth Amendment - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized A. Law enforcement 1. Search (looking for the ‘dead body’) & Seizures (Taking the ‘dead body’ away) a. Exclusionary rules (Weeks v. U.S.)-> 1914: if you, the police, search illegally then you don’t get to pass go, and collect the defendant-> can’t use evidence seized in illegal searches b. Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine (Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. U.S.)- > can’t use evidence seized from an illegal search on a different defendant, not originally the one being seized during the search -> the gambling ring’s black book c. Protection of people, not places (U.S. v. Rabinowitz) d. The exclusionary rule and state law enforcement (Mapp v. Ohio) e. Immediate control (Chimel v. California)-> the right to secure the immediate area around a suspect -> an officer’s safety issue f. Good faith exception to the exclusionary rule (U.S. v. Leon)-> if the police put together a warrant app, and make a mistake, we are not gonna hold the police and handcuff them -> if the police acted in good faith, and weren’t trying to be illegal, then it was okay. g. Plain view doctrine (Having cocaine on the table)-> Ready visibility of objects that might be seized as evidence during a search by police in the absence of a search warrant specifying the seizure of those objects (Harris v. U.S., U.S. v. Irizarry, Arizona v. Hicks, & Horton v. California)-> doesn’t mean peek-a-boo 2. Stop and frisk A. Reasonable suspicion-> A general and reasonable belief that a crime is in progress or has occurred B. Probable cause -> A reasonable belief that a particular person has committed a specific crime C. Encompasses two distinct behaviors 1. Stops are seizures 2. Frisks are searches 3. Arrests -> The act of taking an adult or juvenile into physical custody, by authority of law, for the purpose of charging the person with a criminal offense, delinquent act, or a status offense, terminating with the recording of a specific offense (U.S. v. Mendenhall, U.S. v. Robinson, U.S. v. Sokolow, & Minnesota v. Dickerson) - Warrants A. Bench Warrants B. Three elements: 1. Neutral magistrate-> judge might be predisposed to convict a defendant after repeated appears 2. Probable cause 3. Particularity (Bob the Bad Guy’s Ex-Wife Tips That He Is Selling Drugs) -> Tips need to be from a reliable informant C. Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 1. Searches incident to arrest 2. Consent searches 3. Exigent circumstances searches (Emergency searches) -> School shooting and defendant runs thought your house which is also a meth lab (can arrest and search your house) 4. Vehicle (Fleeing-target exception & Road blocks) - Civil Liability Issues A. Civil remedies B. Criminal remedies C. Non-judicial remedies D. Exclusionary remedies - Police Interrogations: Police have authority to interrogate a person after arrest A. Informants 1. Aguilar v. Texas: two-pronged standard B. Interrogation 1. Inherent coercion 2. Psychological manipulation - Miranda v. Arizona: A. “The entire aura and atmosphere of police interrogation without the notification of rights and an offer of assistance of counsel tends to subjugate the individual to the will of his examiner.” B. “Unless and until such warnings and waiver are demonstrated by prosecution at trial, no evidence obtained as a result of interrogation can be used against him.” C. Miranda Warning 1. The suspect must be warned prior to any questioning that he or she has the right to remain silent 2. Any statements made by the person can be used in a court of law 3. The suspect has the right to the presence of attorney 4. If the person cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed prior to any questioning 5. Opportunity to exercise these rights must be afforded to the suspect throughout the interrogation 6. After such warnings have been given, a person may knowingly and intelligently waive these rights and agree to answer questions or make a statement D. Wavier of Miranda Rights 1. Knowing waiver a. Suspect’s native language b. Understand the advisement 2. Intelligent waiver a. Understand the consequences of not invoking rights E. Public Safety Exceptions to the Miranda Rights 1. Created in 1984, New York v. Quarles 2. Considerations of public safety override the Miranda requirement in order to prevent further harm 3. Used in 2013 in questioning the Boston Marathon Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev - Data Gathering: 1. USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 2. Body cavity searches 3. Electronic eavesdropping 4. Electronic evidence 5. Latent evidence 6. Digital criminal forensics Tuesday, October 4 th Chapter 8: Policing Issues & Challenges - Police Subculture: The set of informal values which characterize the police force as a distinct community with a common identity a. Informalization b. Ongoing c. May emphasize a different set of values compared to mainstream society d. Often extends to personal lives - Police Personality: Authoritarian, Cynical, Secret, Efficient, Suspicious, Hostile, Conservative, Prejudiced, Insecure, Loyal, Individualistic, Dogmatic, & Honorable Police Corruption - Two views a. The Bad Apple-> bad people are picked b. The Bad Barrel-> bad environment creates bad apples - The abuse of police authority for personal or organizational gain - Behavioral deviation from an acceptable ethical standard - “Slippery slope” perspective - Knapp Commission a. New York City Police Department in the 1970s - Types of Corruption a. Grass eaters 1. Accept bribes or goods in exchange for not issuing tickets, making arrests, etc. 2. Do not initiate, but don’t refuse offer b. Meat eaters 1. Solicit bribes or take a share of the drugs they confiscate to sell for their own profit, etc. 2. Initiate activity - Hierarchy of Corruption a. Violent crime b. Denial of civil rights c. Criminal enterprise d. Property crimes e. Major bribes f. Role malfeasance g. Above inconvenient laws h. Minor bribes i. Playing favorites j. Gratuities - Response to Issues of Police Corruption a. Increased police professionalism b. All levels 1. Hiring 2. Increased pay 3. Ethics training 4. Continuing education 5. Drug testing - Internal Review Committee-> Internal affairs: The branch of a police organization tasked with investigating charges of wrongdoing involving members of the department a. Police department bureau internally conducts the investigation into the allegations of wrongdoing b. When necessary, an outside agency can conduct the inquiry - Internal Affairs: Officers may invoke their Garrity rights, which are protections that officers have against self-incrimination in the face of questioning a. Protect officers themselves when being questioned by representatives of their department’s internal affairs division or by their superior officers The Dangers of Police Work - Police and alcohol a. Influence of subculture on drinking - Police and family problems a. Stress of job affects family members - Police and suicide a. High suicide rate - Dealing with the stress of policing a. Long-term stress - Examples of dangers a. Violence b. Suspicious material c. Human bites d. Spitting e. Urine/feces f. Cuts/puncture wounds g. Biological weapons h. CPR/First aid i. Body removal j. Casual contact k. Contact with blood or body fluids l. Contact with dried blood - Stress Reduction a. Exercise and diet b. Meditation c. Abdominal breathing d. Music e. Prayer f. Peer support Use of Force -> Rodney King - The use of physical restraint by a police officer when dealing with a member of the public a. Reasonable and necessary b. Guidelines determined by department - 43.5 million people nationwide have face-to-face contact with the police over a typical 12-month period - Approximately 1.6%, or about 700,000, of these people become subject to the use of force or the threat of force - Use of Force Continuum a. Officer presence b. Verbal commands c. Soft techniques d. Hard techniques e. Deadly force - Less Lethal Weapons-> Designed to disable, capture, or immobilize, but not kill a. Stun guns b. Tasers c. Rubber bullets d. Beanbag projectiles e. Pepper spray f. Snare nets fired from shotguns (in development) g. Disabling sticky foam (in development) - Types if Force 1. Excessive force a. Application of an amount and/or frequency of force greater than required to compel compliance from a willing/unwilling subject 2. Deadly force a. Force likely to cause death or great bodily harm b. The intentional use of a firearm or other instrument resulting in a high probability of death. Racial Profiling - When police officers act on a person’s race, ethnicity, or national origin instead of the person’s actions or information that identifies the person as a suspect - Pre-9/11 vs. post-9/11 - Police Liability: Civil remedies, Criminal remedies, Non-judicial remedies, & Exclusionary rule remedies - Civil Liability: Potential responsibility for payment of damages or other court-ordered enforcement as a result of a ruling in a lawsuit 1. Federal 2. State a. Different from criminal liability Lawsuits - Assault a. High media visibility b. Most well-known - Battery a. High media visibility - False imprisonment a. Arrest without just cause - Malicious prosecution a. Negligent or malicious actions - 1983 lawsuit a. Denies others their constitutional right to life, liberty, or property without due process of law - Bivens action a. A civil suit brought against federal government officials for denying the constitutional rights of others