Ch. 6 Searches for Evidence (Midterm)

Question 1

What are the 4 elements of the 4th Amendment’s search warrant requirement?

Answer 1

1) Particularity
2) Probable cause affidavit
3) Neutral magistrate
4) Knock-and-announce rule

Question 2

The { } Requirement states that the place to be searched must be particularly described.

Answer 2

Particularity

Question 3

What 2 things must officers announce according to the knock-and-announce rule?

Answer 3

1) Who they are
2) That they have a search warrant

Question 4

What is the purpose of the knock-and-announce rule in general?

Answer 4

To preserve private property and privacy

Question 5

Why was the Court in favor of Ms. Sharlene Wilson’s attorney filing a motion to suppress in Wilson v. Arkansas (1995)?

Answer 5

The officers announced who they were and that they had a search warrant AFTER already entering the home

Question 6

What did the Court decide in U.S. v. Banks (2003) regarding the knock-and-announce rule?

Answer 6

Given that Banks was a suspected drug dealer, waiting 10-15 seconds was a reasonable time to wait after knocking and announcing since the cocaine found in his apartment would’ve been gone if officers had waited longer

Question 7

What are the 3 major exceptions to knock-and-announce rules?

Answer 7

1) To prevent violence
2) To prevent destruction of evidence
3) To prevent suspects from escaping

Question 8

Where does the knock-and-announce rule originate from?

Answer 8

English common law

Question 9

What went wrong with the officers’ knock-and-talk strategy in Young v. City of Radcliff (2008)?

Answer 9

The officers were in Young’s backyard (curtilage) and did not have a legal right to be there; knock-and-talk involves officers approaching the front door

Question 10

What are the 5 exemptions to the search warrant requirement?

Answer 10

1) Searches incident to arrest
2) Consent searches
3) Vehicle searches
4) Container searches (within vehicles)
5) Emergency searches (exigent circumstances)

Question 11

What does it mean for searches to be “incident to arrest?”

Answer 11

Searches are conducted before, during, and after arrest

Question 12

What is the only area officers can search in a search incident to arrest?

Answer 12

The area within an officer’s “immediate control”

Question 13

Another name for objects within an officer’s immediate control.

Answer 13

What is the “grabbable area?”

Question 14

What are the 3 purposes for searches incident to arrest?

Answer 14

1) Protect officers
2) Prevent escape
3) Preserve evidence

Question 15

In sum, the scope of a search incident to arrest is limited to…

Answer 15

The immediate area

Question 16

In Chimel v. California (1969), officers had an arrest warrant but no search warrant, and they were unjustified in searching the entire home. What were the 2 key points to take away from this case?

Answer 16

1) There’s no reason to search any room other than that in which the arrest occurs
2) Despite a reasonable home arrest, you can’t search the whole house without a search warrant

Question 17

What was SCOTUS’s ruling for New York v. Belton (1981) regarding searches incident to arrest when the arrestee is arrested outside of their vehicle?

Answer 17

Officers can lawfully search a car and any compartments in the car after arresting its occupants

Question 18

According to Arizona v. Gant (2009), it is a violation of the 4th Amendment to search an arrestee’s vehicle after handcuffing and securing the scene. What are the only 2 instances that this search would NOT violate the 4th Amendment?

Answer 18

1) It is reasonable to believe the arrestee may access the vehicle during the search
2) It is reasonable to believe the vehicle may contain evidence of the arrest’s offense

Question 19

This rule spawned from the U.S. v. Robinson (1973) case.

Answer 19

What is the bright-line rule?

Question 20

The Robinson bright-line rule states that officers are always permitted to search anyone they take into custody for 2 reasons. What are these 2 reasons?

Answer 20

1) There is possible danger to police taking suspects into custody
2) It’s impossible for the Court to review every police decision

Question 21

What are the 3 conditions that must be met for searches incident to arrest for minor offenses, according to Knowles v. Iowa (1998)?

Answer 21

1) Probable cause to arrest
2) Officer has a hunch that they can find evidence of a crime on the arrestee
3) The arrest is a valid arrest

Question 22

With regards to consent searches, consent must be { } and may be { } later.

Answer 22

1) Voluntary
2) Withdrawn

Question 23

This consent search test establishes that a consent search is only valid if the person being searched voluntarily consents and knows they are waiving their 4th Amendment rights.

Answer 23

What is the Waiver Test of Consent Search?

Question 24

This consent search test looks at the officer’s state of mind and whether the officer reasonably believed the suspect consented under all circumstances.

Answer 24

What is the Voluntariness Test of Consent to Search?

Question 25

In Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973), SCOTUS held that the State must demonstrate that consent was voluntarily given and not…

Answer 25

Coerced

Question 26

Why did the majority of drivers in the empirical research of consent searches have negative feelings about consent searches?

Answer 26

They felt compelled to consent to being searched

Question 27

In U.S. v. Rodney (1992), Rodney consented to a body search, so the officer ran his hand up Rodney’s legs and felt a small rock-like object in Rodney’s crotch. What was the Court of Appeals’ decision?

Answer 27

Consenting to a body search also means consenting to having the groin area frisked

Question 28

What is the difference between actual & apparent authority for third-party consent?

Answer 28

Actual - objective
Apparent - subjective

Question 29

Which third-party consent authority test did SCOTUS adopt as the minimum requirement for the 4th Amendment?

Answer 29

Apparent authority

Question 30

Although apparent authority is objective, law enforcement officers must { } believe that the third party in question thinks they have the authority to give consent to have your home searched.

Answer 30

Reasonably

Question 31

While U.S. v. Matlock dealt with the { } authority to consent, Illinois v. Rodriguez dealt with the { } authority to consent.

Answer 31

1) Actual
2) Apparent

Question 32

For what 3 reasons are vehicles the exception to the warrant requirement?

Answer 32

1) Reduced expectation of privacy in vehicles
2) Vehicles are mobile and can leave
3) Persons & containers within a vehicle may be searched (assuming probable cause exists to do so)

Question 33

From Carroll v. U.S. (1925), this doctrine states that a vehicle can be searched without a search warrant if there is probable cause and exigent circumstances to believe that the vehicle could possibly leave the area before a warrant is obtained.

Answer 33

What is the Carroll Doctrine?

Question 34

Searches of containers in vehicles are an exception to a warrant requirement. Give 3 examples of containers.

Answer 34

1) Purses
2) Bags
3) Backpacks

Question 35

What was the ruling for CA v. Acevado (1991) regarding automobile searches and the containers within automobiles?

Answer 35

Police can search a car and its containers if there is probable cause to believe there’s contraband or evidence

Question 36

In this case, SCOTUS ruled that passengers possessed a reduced expectation of privacy with regard to the property they transport in cars.

Answer 36

What is Wyoming v. Houghton (1999)?

Question 37

What are the 4 main types of exigent circumstances that allow emergency searches to be warrantless?

Answer 37

1) Ensuring officer safety
2) Destruction of evidence
3) Hot pursuit
4) People in community in danger