Crim Proc Midterm

Question 1

Where does most of our criminal procedure come from?

Answer 1

The Constitution

Question 2

What is legal precedence/judicial precedence?

Answer 2

a standard established by a court’s decision

Question 3

What is precedent?

Answer 3

a prior decision that’s binding on a similar present case

Question 4

Which one of the constitutional amendments provides Defendants with due process of law?

Answer 4

The Fifth Amendment

Question 5

What was the due process revolution and when did it occur?

Answer 5

1960s when the Supreme Court decided that the states provide due process and equal protection of the law

Question 6

What are the 2 petitions that a defendant can use to ask the Supreme Court to review a case?

Answer 6

habeas corpus and certiorari

Question 7

What was Powell vs. Alabama, what doctrine did it establish?

Answer 7

established the fundamental fairness doctrine, 8 black boys accused of raping Ruby Bates and Victoria Price, alcoholic lawyer, alcoholic jury, eight boys sentenced to death and one was granted a mistrial, the Supreme Court said Alabama denied the boys the right to due process of law

Question 8

What was Brown vs. Mississippi, what doctrine did it establish?

Answer 8

fundamental fairness doctrine, Ellington was taken to a dead white man’s home where the Sherriff accused him of killing the white man, Ellington was hung and beaten with straps until he confessed to the murder he never committed, Brown and Shields were also brought to the jail and severely whipped until they couldn’t sit down, SCOTUS reversed the men’s convictions, the use of the confessions thus obtained as the basis for conviction and sentence was a clear denial of due process

Question 9

When are state courts a source of criminal procedure?

Answer 9

state courts are crucial source of criminal procedure when cases involve violations of state laws, state courts play significant role in interpreting and applying state-specific criminal procedure laws and constitutional provisions, each state has own criminal code and procedural rules, state courts are responsible for ensuring these rules are followed, state constitutions may provide additional protections for individuals accused of crimes, federal law and US constitution set basic standards, state courts often have authority to establish and interpret their own criminal procedure rules within these broader legal frameworks

Question 10

What must a defendant show to prove that he/she were deprived of equal protection based on selective prosecution?

Answer 10

The selective prosecution had a discriminatory effect upon the defendant The selective prosecution was pursued with discriminatory intent.

Question 11

What is selective incorporation?

Answer 11

some rights were incorporated and some weren’t

Question 12

What is total/full incorporation?

Answer 12

all the provisions were incorporated under the due process clause

Question 13

What was Palko vs. Connecticut?

Answer 13

not all the rights on the Bill of Rights are fundamental enough to be incorporated, Palko was convicted of second degree murder which the state of Connecticut appealed and won a new trial and Palko was tried again and convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death, this is in violation of the double jeopardy clause

Question 14

What do we mean when we’re evaluating the constitutionality of government?

Answer 14

is the government following the rights explained in the constitution

Question 15

What is the presumption of regularity?

Answer 15

presumes government actions are lawful in the absence of “clear evidence to the contrary”

Question 16

What is a search?

Answer 16

refers to the exploration or investigation of person’s body, property, or belongings with intention of finding evidence related to a crime, can involve physical actions such as looking through personal items, conducting a pat-down, or using technology like metal detectors or x-ray scanners, searches are subject to constitutional limitations, particularly 4th amendment , which protects individuals form unreasonable searches and seizures, many cases law enforcement needs warrant based on probable cause to conduct search, although exceptions such as consent, exigent circumstances, or searches incident to a lawful arrest

Question 17

What is the trespass doctrine?

Answer 17

the Fourth Amendment doctrine that refersto idea that evidence obtained through unlawful entry or intrusion may be excluded from court proceedings

Question 18

What is the privacy doctrine?

Answer 18

the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures extends beyond constitutionally protected areas to include circumstances where a reasonable citizen would expect privacy

Question 19

What is a trust-based doctrine?

Answer 19

demonstrates the importance of building trust between law enforcement and communities

Question 20

What are the 4 questions that we ask in order for the Fourth Amendment to apply?

Answer 20

1. Is there a government action or involvement?
2. Does the individual have a reasonable expectation of privacy?
3. Has there been a search or seizure by the government?
4. Is that search or seizure reasonable under the circumstances?

Question 21

What was Illinois vs. Caballes?

Answer 21

The defendant was stopped for a routine speeding violation. While the car was stopped and the trooper was preparing a warning ticket, another officer walked a drug dog around the car. The dog alerted; the car was searched based on probable cause; drugs were found. The Supreme Court held that this was permissible. A dog alert is not a “search” and in this case, the time it took to walk the dog around the car did not prolong the stop. Thus, there was no Terry violation and no need for a warrant or an articulable suspicion to authorize the use of the dog

Question 22

What was Katz vs. US?

Answer 22

changed forever the protections of citizens from government interference
FBI suspected someone of being a bookie (booking illegal gambling) bookmaking was illegal
The government would wiretap phones so citizens used phone booths to book bets, FBI put listening device on outside of phone booth and could hear Katz booking bets
Katz argued no warrant, no court order, FBI argued it wasn’t a search because Katz was in a public area, Supreme Court disagreed and made a new doctrine that protects people, FBI invaded Katz’s privacy of reasonable expectation of privacy so it was a search and violated 4th amendment
7:1 decision, 4th amendment protects people not places, in a public place the uninvited ear during his phone call was an invasion of Katz’s expectation of privacy

Question 23

What was Smith vs. Maryland?

Answer 23

Court rules individuals do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding phone numbers they dial, case involved installation of pen register without a warrant, Court held that individuals voluntarily conveyed the phone numbers tot eh telephone company during ordinary business, they could not claim a legitimate expectation of privacy, laid groundwork for third party doctrine suggesting individual relinquish certain privacy rights when voluntarily sharing information with third parties

Question 24

What was California vs. Greenwood?

Answer 24

Supreme Court rules that individuals do not have reasonable expectation of privacy in garbage left for collection outside their homes, case involved warrantless search of suspect’s trash, led to discovery of evidence related to drug trafficking, Court held once individuals discard items in public place, they lose reasonable expectation of privacy in those items, decision emphasized idea that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in items knowingly exposed to the public, even if placed outside residence

Question 25

What was US vs. White?

Answer 25

Supreme Court addressed issues related to electronic surveillance and the admissibility of evidence obtained through wiretapping, Court held conversations intercepted by government informant wearing a concealed wire, not by government agents using electronic surveillance, were not subject to 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, Court rules informant, being a participant in the conversations, was not acting as government agent in traditional sense, the evidence obtained in this manner was admissible in court, decision had implications for use of informants in gathering evidence and the distinction between private and government actions in context of electronic surveillance

Question 26

What was US vs. Jones?

Answer 26

Supreme Court ruled attaching GPS device to suspect’s vehicle and monitoring their movements constituted a search under 4th amendment, decision emphasized importance of protecting individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy in their movements, even in public spaces

Question 27

What was Kyllo vs. US?

Answer 27

Supreme Court held the use of thermal imaging tech to detect heat patterns in private home constituted a search under 4th amendment, decison emphasized protection fo individuals from unwarranted government intrusion into inimate details of the home, reaffirming principle that tech aiding in surveillance shoudl not violate a reasonable expectation of privacy

Question 28

What is a seizure of property?

Answer 28

some meaningful, government interference with an individual’s possession of property

Question 29

What does the Fourth Amendment balance?

Answer 29

It balances the government’s power to control crime and the right of individuals to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures

Question 30

What is the objective basis required for an arrest?

Answer 30

typically probable cause

Question 31

What is the balancing approach to reasonableness?

Answer 31

involves weighing the interests of law enforcement against an individual’s 4th amendment rights, concept often applied in cases involving searches, seizures, and use of force, idea is to strike balance between the government’s need to enforce law and maintain public safety and an individual’s right to be free form unreasonable searches and seizures, courts often consider factors such as severity of crime, immediacy of threat, intrusiveness of law enforcement actions, approach aims to ensure government actions are reasonable and justified in specific circumstances

Question 32

What was Terry vs. Ohio?

Answer 32

Supreme Court established stop and frisk exception to 4th amendment’s warrant requirements, decision allow officers to stop and briefly detain person if they have reaosnable suspicion of criminal activity, officers can frisk individual for weapons if reasonable belief perosn may be armed and dangerous, decision aimed to balance LE need for protection with individual 4th amendemnt rights

Question 33

When is a frisk permissible under Terry vs. Ohio?

Answer 33

must be a narrowly drawn authority to permit a reasonable search for weapons for the protection of the police officer, where he has reason to believe that he is dealing with an armed and dangerous individual

Question 34

What was Maryland vs. Wilson?

Answer 34

Supreme Court rules officers have authority to order passengers out of vehicle during traffic stop, decision is grounded in concerns for officer safety and allows officers to make reasonable precautions by ordering passengers to exit vehicle without need to individualized suspicion

Question 35

What was Florida vs. JL?

Answer 35

In J. L., by contrast, we determined that no reasonable suspicion arose from a bare-bones tip that a young black male in a plaid shirt standing at a bus stop was carrying a gun. The tipster did not explain how he knew about the gun, nor did he suggest that he had any special familiarity with the young man’s affairs. As a result, police had no basis for believing “that the tipster ha[d] knowledge of concealed criminal activity.” Furthermore, the tip included no predictions of future behavior that could be corroborated to assess the tipster’s credibility. We accordingly concluded that the tip was insufficiently reliable to justify a stop and frisk.

Question 36

What is reasonable suspicion?

Answer 36

more than a hunch, objective facts, some minimal level of objective justification

Question 37

What is categorical suspicion?

Answer 37

suspicion that falls on suspects because they fit into a broad category of people, such as being in a particular location, being members of a particular race or ethnicity, or fitting a profile

Question 38

What is a frisk?

Answer 38

once-over, light pat downs of outer clothing by officers to check for weapons

Question 39

What is a custodial arrest?

Answer 39

an official taking a person into custody and holding her to answer criminal charges

Question 40

What is the objective basis to justify a stop and or frisk?

Answer 40

must have reasonable suspicion that justifies officer intrusion

Question 41

What is the objective basis to justify a full-blown custodial arrest?

Answer 41

the arrest was backed up by probable cause

Question 42

Can categorical suspicion alone justify a stop and or frisk?

Answer 42

categorical suspicion alone is not enough to justify a stop and frisk they must have reasonable suspicion to justify a stop and frisk

Question 43

Where does reasonable suspicion come from?

Answer 43

it arises from specific and articulable facts that lead law enforcement to believe an individual is, was, or will be involved in criminal activity

Question 44

What are the permitted sources of reasonable suspicion?

Answer 44

permitted sources include observed behavior, information form reliable informants, unusual or suspicious circumstances, and an individual’s presence in a high crime area

Question 45

What is the rationale and justification behind a frisk?

Answer 45

the rationale is to ensure the safety of law enforcement officers by allowing them to search for weapons that could pose a threat

Question 46

What is the scope of a reasonable terry stop?

Answer 46

the scope is narrow and should be focused on ensuring officer safety and confirming or dispelling the suspicion of criminal activity, not intended for an extensive search but rather a brief and minimally intrusive encounter

Question 47

Who determines the ultimate legitimacy of an arrest and or a request of an arrest warrant?

Answer 47

a judge determines the ultimate legitimacy of an arrest and request of an arrest warrant

Question 48

What was Draper vs. US?

Answer 48

James Alonzo Draper was prosecuted for knowingly concealing and transporting heroin in violation of federal narcotics laws. The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado denied Draper’s motion to suppress the heroin, and Draper was convicted. Draper appealed. The U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and affirmed, Marsh had probable cause and reasonable grounds to believe that petitioner (Draper) was committing a violation of the laws of the United States relating to narcotic drugs at the time he arrested him. The arrest was therefore lawful, and the subsequent search and seizure, having been made incident to that lawful arrest, were likewise valid

Question 49

What is probable cause?

Answer 49

reasonable belief that a crime has been, is being, or will be committed based on specific and articulable facts, goes beyond mere suspicion but does not require the same level of certainty as proof beyond a reasonable doubt

Question 50

What may officers rely on to build probable cause?

Answer 50

all their senses what they see. what they hear. what they smell and what they feel.

Question 51

What was Atwater vs. City of Lago Vista?

Answer 51

Supreme Court rules the 4th amendment does not prohibit arrest of person for minor criminal offense, even if offense punishable by fine, Atwater was arrested and taken into custody for seatbelt violation, Court held as long as an arrest is based on probable cause the 4th amendment does not require law enforcement to issue citation instead of making a full custodial arrest for minor offenses, decision emphasized discretionary authority of law enforcement to make arrests based on their judgement and probable cause

Question 52

What was Tennessee vs. Garner?

Answer 52

Supreme Court rules use of deadly force by law enforcement to apprehend a fleeing suspect is unconstitutional if the suspect poses no immediate threat to officers or others, case involved shooting of unarmed fleeing suspect, Garner, by police officer, Court held the use of deadly force in such situations violates 4th amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable seizures, decision established use of deadly force is justifiable when probable cause to believe suspect poses significant threat of death or serious physical injury to officers/others,

Question 53

What are exceptions to arrest warrants?

Answer 53

exceptions are probable cause, when suspect is in the act of committing a crime, when suspect is fleeing form scene of crime, in emergencies where public safety is at risk

Question 54

What is direct information?

Answer 54

what police see, hear, and smell

Question 55

What is the standard of proof?

Answer 55

the 2 primary standards of proof are probable cause and beyond a reasonable doubt