4th Amendment Flashcards
Basic Crimpro analysis
Was a right “triggered” by the fact pattern?
What is the scope of the protection of the right?
Did a gov’t agent violate that right?
What is the appropriate remedy?
Warrants and presumptive reasonability
When police act pursuant to a warrant based on PC, conduct is presumptively reasonable. Only rebutted if DFT can show defect in warrant or warrant process
Search WITHOUT a warrant is presumptively unreasonable - exclude unless an exception justifies
REMEMBER: bad warrant not enough for exclusion. Good-faith exception means you need BAD FAITH by police in obtaining or relying
Seizures
Seizures are police action that results in MEANINGFUL INTERFERENCE w a possessory interest. Taking control is a seizure - secret GPS is not (although touching may be search)
When police conduct would make reasonable person feel like they are not free to leave, that individual has been seized. Usually either:
- physical force OR
- show of authority and submission
Search
A search is any “investigatory trespass” on PERSON, PAPERS, HOME, or EFFECTS, or violating any SUBJECTIVE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY that is OBJECTIVELY REASONABLE
(effects is chattel property even if exposed to the property)
OPEN FIELDS DOCTRINE: property beyond the curtilage of the home is not protected
Searches and animals/sense enhancing devices
Police dogs aren’t a search because they only detect contraband, no reasonable privacy interest in contraband. However, could still be a search if they use them on a protected area
Commonly available sense enhancers (binoculars etc) are not a search unless they enter the curtilage, or the device “sees through the walls” of the home (thermal imaging)
Arrest warrant - implicit authority
Arrest warrants grant implicit authority to search DFT’s HOME ONLY if they think DFT is at home and DFT doesn’t open the door
PLAIN VIEW EXCEPTION: can seize contraband during, if it’s in plain view, despite warrant being for arrest
Invalidating a warrant
Prove either:
- warrant not based on PC
- magistrate not neutral and detached
- warrant failed to describe with particularity the thing to be seized or place to be searched
- warrant affidavit so lacking in PC that not even a rookie officer would trust it
Good faith exception to exclusion
Even if the warrant is bad, don’t get exclusionary remedy unless the flaw is the FAULT of the police who relied on it
Unreasonable warrant execution
Warrant execution that “shocks the conscience” is unreasonable (e.g. can’t have bullet removed from suspect when it would endanger)
knock-and-announce: 3 exceptions, remedy
Knock-and-announce rule: required, unless it would
- endanger officers
- lead to evidence destruction
- cause flight of suspect
Knock-and-announce violation DOES NOT get exclusion
Probable cause
a “fair probability”, based on the circumstances. “reasonable officer” objective test
subjective motive irrelevant to reasonability - pretexts ok, for example
PC - informants and tips
Tips are a valid PC basis if informant’s tip has specific details AND reliability of both details and informant are confirmed prior
Search requirements - 2
REMEMBER - PC is not enough to justify a warrantless search! There is a JUSTIFICATION and an AUTHORIZATION requirement - PC just hits the first one. Still need an exception
Warrant exceptions - seizures
No warrant required to arrest suspect in public for a felony
Misdemeanor arrests either need a warrant or for crime to occur in officer’s presence
PC always required
Plain view for property
Terry stops
“Brief investigatory seizure” - no warrant needed.
Still must be reasonable - but REASONABLE SUSPICION not PC - MORE than a hunch
Scope limited to time needed in the exercise of due diligence, to confirm/negate suspicion
