Criminal Law / Procedure Flashcards
Post-Indictment 6A Right
A defendant’s 6A right to counsel is violated when the prosecutor uses, as evidence, statements made by the defendant that were deliberately elicited from him after he had been indicted and in the absence of his counsel
(Ex., Informants in cell)
Use and Derivative Use Immunity
Prevents the prosecution only from using the witness’s own testimony or any evidence derived from the testimony against the witness.
Waiving Self Incrimination
A person can waive the privilege against self-incrimination by voluntarily testifying about the incriminating matter.
Justification for the use of Force sufficient to cause death or serious bodily harm
A defendant must have a reasonable belief that he himself is threatened with force of that sort.
Is a Grand jury entitled to consider hearsay?
Yes, a grand jury is entitled to consider hearsay and is not limited by the exclusionary rule.
Capital Case Juror Excusal
A trial court properly may excuse a juror for cause from serving in both the guilt and penalty phase of a capital case if a juror’s views regarding the death penalty would prevent or substantially impair the juror from impartially deciding whether the death penalty is warranted in that particular case.
Scope of the Exclusionary Rule
Does not include the right of the defendant to confess to a crime only when totally rational and properly motivated
Statements are not considered involuntary when it is the result of mental disease
Voluntary Intoxication Defense
Voluntary Intoxication is only a defense to specific intent crimes, not to crimes involving criminal negligence, such as manslaughter
Does a suspect need to be informed that he is under arrest before a search incident to a lawful arrest can take place?
Does a warrrantless entry in violation of constitutional rights a sufficient basis to suppress a confession?
No. The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine would not exclude an otherwise properly received confession.
When is an Out of Court Identification Procedure Improper
An out of court identification procedure is improper if it is unnecessarily suggestive, producing a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification. However, even if an out of court identification procedure is unnecessarily suggestive, suppression of in court testimony is not require if the eyewitness’s identification is shown to be reliable under a multi-factor inquiry.
Is an unlawful arrest an adequate reason to dismiss an indictment or subsequent criminal prosecution?
No, although any evidence collected a a fruit of an unlawful arrest may be inadmissible at trial.
Warrant for Person not on the premises
When the police have a valid arrest warrant, they are not authorized to forcibly enter the home unless there is probably cause to believe the person named is on the premises.
Is Direct Evidence required for a conspiracy?
The conspiratorial agreement need not be proven through direct evidence, as long as the circumstantial evidence taken in the light most favorable to the prosecution is sufficient to allow a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a conspiratorial agreement.
Automobile Exception Passengers
If passenger exits an automobile before a search, the police cannot use the exception to search without a warrant and absent any other applicable exceptions
