Criminal Procedure Flashcards
Systems of Criminal Procedure –> Federal and State Systems
4A, 5A, and 6A create floor (not ceiling) as to rights that states must extend to citizens.
–> States may create more extensive rights under their own constitutions, subject to ultimate review by state supreme courts.
Systems of Criminal Procedure –> The 4A, 5A, and 6A
4A- Protects the people and their papers, houses, and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures.
–> Also requires particularized (as opposed to general) warrants that are supported by PC.
5A- Requires that no person be denied life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
–> Also grants each person a privilege against self incrimination.
6A- Requires that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused has a RTC to assist in his defense.
Exclusionary Rule –> Purpose + Application
Procedural rule of fed con law used to deter unlawful police conduct.
- -> Evidence seized in violation of the 4A (including physical evidence and statements) is INADMISSIBLE in a criminal proceeding.
- -> Exc Rule also applies to violations of 5A and 6A; however, not (usually) applicable to Miranda violations.
Exclusionary Rule –> Fruit of the Poisonous Tree + 3 Exceptions
In addition to illegally obtained evidence, any additional evidence, including oral statements and physical objects acquired directly or indirectly from the illegal arrest/search/seizure must also be EXCLUDED.
Exception- may still be admitted if taint dissipated by:
(1) Independent Evidence- evidence obtained from source independent of original illegality.
(2) Inevitable Discovery- evidence that would have been discovered regardless of illegality; or
(3) Attenuation- confession or consent to illegal search distant enough from initial illegality that it is considered voluntary and not 4A violation.
- —-> Factors: (1) whether Miranda warnings were given; (2) temporal proximity of arrest and confession/consent; (3) presence of intervening circumstances; and (4) purpose and flagrancy of official misconduct.
Exclusionary Rule –> Balancing Approach on the Exclusionary Rule + Exception
Exclusionary rule precludes only the use of suppressed evidence in the prosecution’s case-in-chief and does not apply to the use of evidence for impeachment.
–> However, confessions which have been coerced or immunized are inadmissible for any purpose.
Exclusionary Rule –> Balancing Approach on the Exclusionary Rule - Good Faith Exception (application and nonapplication)
Evidence obtained pursuant to an invalid warrant will not be excluded if a reasonably well-trained officer would have believed that the warrant was valid.
Aspects for considering the good faith exception include:
(1) whether the police were acting on good faith reliance of a facially valid warrant;
(2) whether the police were acting in reliance of a valid statute; and
(3) whether the police were acting in reliance of a ct official rather than a PO
Good faith exception to exclusionary rule does not apply when:
(1) the police lie or mislead the ct in attaining a warrant
(2) the magistrate is not neutral or detached, and
(3) no reasonable PO would have believed the warrant was valid
Exclusionary Rule –> Limitations on the Exclusionary Rule (GRSCM)
(1) The Excl rule had not been extended to GRAND JURY proceedings, and evidence at issue may be considered in granting an indictment.
(2) Evidence obtained under the REASONABLE RELIANCE of the validity of a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate is not subject to the excl rule.
(3) Evidence excluded by the rule from use by one SOVEREIGN may be used in the civil proceedings of another sovereign.
(4) Evidence excluded by the rule for violating the 4A 5A or 6A may be used to impeach testimony given on either direct examination or cross.
(5) A confession obtained w/o giving MIRANDA warnings may be used to impeach a D’s testimony, unless it is coerced or immunized.
Exclusionary Rule –> Procedure at Trial and Enforcement after Appeal
A D has a right to a suppression hearing, at which time the judge (as a matter of law) determines the admissibility of the evidence out of the jury’s presence.
Admission of illegally obtained evidence constitutes reversible error unless the error is “harmless.”
–> Under this standard, the govt must prove beyond a reas doubt that the error did not contribute to a conviction.
4A –> Government Action
4A applies only to govt (not private) conduct.
- -> When a private party acting on his own acquires evidence that the govt later seeks to introduce in a criminal pros, neither the 4A nor excl rule applies.
- —–> However, when a private party acts at the direction of the govt agent or pursuant to an official policy, any search conducted and evidence seized is subject to 4A scrutiny.
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: General Principles (warrant req; “custody”; “arrest”; strip searches)
Arrest warrants generally not required when arresting someone in a public place.
Whether a person is in custody is determined based on the objective circumstances surrounding the interrogation, particularly:
(1) person did not feel that he was at liberty to terminate the interrogation and leave; and
(2) person was in an environment that presented inherently coercive pressures.
When a person is taken into custody for the purpose of commencing a criminal action, an arrest has occurred.
Officials may strip search individuals who have been arrested for any crime, even w/o RS that they are dangerous or carrying contraband.
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Warrant Requirement
A valid arrest may occur either w/ or w/o a warrant; generally, no warrant reqd for an arrest (police need only PC).
–> POs may come into possession of requisite fact/circumstances for PC from their own observations of the suspect OR through information obtained by third parties.
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Warrant Requirement - Informants (relation to warrant + 2 reqs)
PC to arrest may be obtained indirectly through an informant; tip may serve as basis for PC arrest if reliability estd by:
(1) the informant’s tip containing specific details; and
(2) the reliability of both the details and the informant being confirmed prior to the moment of arrest.
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Warrant Requirement - In-Home Arrests (consent/exig circ - 3 reqs) (3rd party home arrests) (knock and announce)
An arrest warrant is reqd before POs can arrest a person in his own home, absent exigent circumstances or consent.
Consent/exigent circumstances estd when:
(1) an arrest attempt outside the home is thwarted because suspect retreats into the home
(2) there is insuff time to secure a warrant because the delay would allow the suspect to evade arrest or destroy evidence; or
(3) the arresting PO is in hot pursuit and has PC to effect a valid arrest of the suspect
Third Party Home Arrests
–>POs generally may not legally search for the subject of an arrest warrant in the home of a 3rd party absent exigent circumstances or consent w/o first obtaining a search warrant for those premises.
Knock and Announce
- -> Unless exigent circumstances exist, POs must knock and announce their identity before entering to make the arrest.
- -> Violation of the knock and announce rule does not automatically trigger the exclusion of evidence seized after the violation.
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Warrantless Arrests at CL
Both POs and private citizens may make arrests for felonies committed in their presence.
–> A PO may arrest a person for a felony not committed in his presence when he has reasonable grounds to believe a person did, in fact, commit the felony.
POs and private citizens may make arrests for misdemeanors when:
(1) the crime is committed in their presence; and
(2) the misdemeanor amounts to a breach of the peace.
- -> A warrant is reqd for a misdemeanor that the PO did not personally observe, regardless of whether arrewst takes place inside/outside the suspect’s home.
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Probable Cause (+ Anticipatory/Condition warrants 2 reqs)
PC (reqd at time of arrest) is measure of justification that applies to full-scale intrusions (searches, seizures, and arrests).
- -> Defined as that quantity of facts and circumstances w/in the PO’s knowledge that would warrant a reasonable person to conclude that the individual in question has committed a crime (for an arrest) or that specific items related to criminal activity can be found at a particular location (for a search).
- -> Evaluated in terms of what was known at the moment of the govt intrusion; a PO may est PC by considering events leading up to the moment of arrest.
Anticipatory/Condition Warrants
- -> Warrants that are conditioned on an event occurring (such as delivery of a package); 2 showings reqd to issue such a warrant:
(1) if the triggering condition occurs, there must be a fair probability that evidence of a crime or contraband will be found at a particular location; and
(2) there is PC that the triggering condition will occur.
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Reasonable Suspicion
RS is a belief based on articulable information that is more than a mere hunch used by a reasonable person or PO that the suspect has/is about to engage in illegal/criminal activity.
–> Cts look to totality of circumstances to see whether PO has particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing.
Flight
–> Flight is not enough for PC but is enough for RS
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Terry Standard
In order to frisk a stopped individual, the PO must articulate RS that the suspect is armed and dangerous.
Anonymous Tips
–> An anonymous tip alone is inadequate; however, under the totality of circumstances, an anonymous tip coupled w/ PO corroboration of some info contained in the tip shows suff indicia of reliability to justify investigative stop
4A –> Arrests and Other Detentions: Terry Standard - Stop-and-Frisk
If a PO reasonably believes, based on PO’s own observations or those of an informant, that criminal activity may be afoot, then the PO may stop and briefly question a criminal suspect.
- -> The reqd belief or RS must be supported by objective evidence that the suspect is engaged/about to become engaged in criminal activity, or is a wanted criminal.
- -> The PO may do a limited pat down of suspect’s outer garments (a “frisk”) for weapons if they have a reasonable and articulable suspicion that person detained may be armed and dangerous (despite lack of PC or warrant).
- -> A Terry stop based on less than full PC is permitted when the detainee is suspected of involvement in a past crime constituting a felony or a threat to public safety.
Improper Subjective PO Basis
–> Fact that a PO had some improper subjective basis for stop will not result in finding that stop was illegal, as long as the stop was supported by an objectively reasonable belief that the suspect was engaged or about to engage in criminal activity.
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Search
A person may assert his 4A rights only where:
(1) there is a govt intrusion into his reasonable expectation of privacy, or
(2) when the govt’s investigatory conduct results in a physical trespass against his person, home, papers, or effects.
When govt action qualifies as search under either test, a D may seek remedy of exclusion of evidence discovered during search (but only if the D has estd standing to object to the govt conduct).
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Standing
D must show legit expectation of privacy in the items seized or in the premises searched.
–> There must be a fairly substantial nexus between the D and the place searched (a passenger in a car lacks standing to challenge validity of car search; however car passenger has standing to challenge police stop of car).
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Held Out to the Public
A D has a reasonable expectation of privacy when the objects identified by the govt investigation are not held out to the public.
- -> Further, a D does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the following items (even if not held out to public):
(1) handwriting exemplars
(2) voice exemplars
(3) bank records
(4) pen registers, which record telephone numbers dialed; and
(5) private conversations, including eavesdropping
Note: A D loses any privacy right that may have existed w/ discarded property, such as commingled garbage and abandoned rental premises.
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Open Fields Doctrine
Any unoccupied or undeveloped area outside of the curtilage (the living space directly around the home) is not protected by the 4A.
- -> Protection also not applied to naked eye observations of private property by air.
- -> Areas not considered part of the home w/in the meaning of the 4A so physical trespass into open fields does not qualify as a search.
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Search and Seizure and the Use of Police Dogs
Generally, a canine search does not constitute an unreasonable search unless the canine physically intrudes upon a constitutionally protected area (home, curtilage, or person).
–> SCOTUS: PO use of trained detection dog to sniff narcotics on the front porch of a person’s home is a search w/in the 4A (therefore, w/o consent, reqs both PC and search warrant).
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Search and Seizure and the Use of Police Dogs - Automobile Exception
Use of drug-sniffing dogs trained to detect contraband, but not other items, does not invade the privacy rights of the suspect.
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Search and Seizure and the Use of Police Dogs - Administrative Searches
To protect airline passengers from weapons and explosives, warrantless administrative searches are permitted at airports.
- -> A passenger may avoid being searched by declining to bard the plane.
- -> Although narcotics sniffing dogs may smell a passenger’s luggage, any resulting detention must be brief, and luggage seizure is subject to 4A limitations.
4A –> Evidentiary Search and Seizure: Search and Seizure and the Use of Police Dogs - Traffic Stops
SCOTUS: Drug sniffing dogs are allowed during traffic stops, as long as prolongation of stop for inspection is brief.
–> POs may not prolong traffic stops to wait for drug-sniffing dogs to inspect vehicles; a PO stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made violates the 4A.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Rule
A search conducted by a govt authority w/o a warrant is presumptively invalid unless it falls w/in an exception.
–> Thus, reasonable search under 4A must be conducted either pursuant to a warrant OR under exception to warrant req.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Search and Arrest Warrants
Warrant
–> A judicial authorization for police action (either to search a particular place- search warrant- or arrest a particular person- arrest warrant).
Search Warrant
–> Must be issued by a neutral and detached magistrate after an adequate showing of PC, and must describe w/ particularity the place to be search and items to be seized.
Arrest Warrant
–> Must be issued by a neutral and detached magistrate after an adequate showing of PC
4A –> Warranted Actions: Warrant Requirements
Either (1) oral testimony or (2) an affidavit must set forth the facts/circumstances relied on by the magistrate; magistrate makes an independent judgment of the reasonableness of the requested search/seizure to determine if there is PC.
Warrant must describe w/ particularity the place to be searched and the item or person to be seized; absent independent justification, a search warrant confers POs only the authority to search names places/persons.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Warrant Requirements - Plain View Doctrine
The scope of the search is limited to premises described in the warrant; however, contraband not named in the warrant may be properly seized under the plain view doctrine where POs are acting under a valid warrant.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Warrant Requirements - Probable Cause
Warrants must be based on PC; PC is satisfied when a 2 prong test is met:
(1) the testimony or affidavit presented to the magistrate contains facts/circumstances that are still relevant and not out of date; and
(2) it must be suff that a reasonable person would conclude it to be more probable than not that evidence of named items/persons will be found.
A warrant based on an informant’s tip will be issued when PC is est under the totality of the circumstances; relevant factors:
(1) credible info
(2) reliable informant
(3) police corroboration and
(4) declaration against interest
4A –> Warranted Actions: Warrant Requirements - Probable Cause - Challenging Affidavit
A D may challenge the affidavit upon which a warrant was issued by proving by a preponderance of the evidence the following elements:
(1) a substantial showing that the affidavit contained false statements;
(2) the statement s were made intentionally, knowingly, or in reckless disregard for the truth; and
(3) the magistrate’s finding of PC could not have been made w/o the false statements
4A –> Warranted Actions: Execution of Warrant
A search warrant need not specify the precise manner for its execution, yet limitations do apply as follows:
(1) only the police, not private citizens, may execute a warrant;
(2) a search warrant must be executed promptly while PC still exists; and
(3) absent exigent circumstances, a PO must knock and announce his presence before attempting a forced entry
- -> A violation of the known and announce rule does not req the automatic suppression of all evidence found in the subsequent search.
Unless an exception to warrant req applies, a search/arrest conducted pursuant to an invalid warrant will constitute a 4A violation.
–> Warrantless searches are generally unconstitutional unless they fall w/in a warrant exception.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement (List)
(1) Searches incident to lawful arrest
(2) Automobile exception
(3) Plain view
(4) Consent
(5) Searches pursuant to a stop
(6) Hot pursuit
(7) Exigent circumstances
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Searches Incident to a Lawful Arrest
SILA (Home)
To protect arresting POs and prevent destruction of evidence, the D’s person (as well as the area w/in his immediate control - his wingspan) may be searched incident to lawful arrest.
–> May include a cursory scan (protective sweep) of adjoining rooms; the entire domicile may be scanned provided there is RS of an armed accomplice.
SILA (Car)
If a custodial arrest is effected while the D is in a car, POs may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle only if it is reasonable to believe that the D might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest.
SILA (Generally)
- -> A SILA must be contemporaneous w/ arrest or preceding it.
- -> The warrantless search and seizure of digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Automobile Exception
SCOTUS: once the POs have PC to search the moving/temporarily stopped car, they may seize the car and search it later (even if there is enough time to obtain a warrant between the seizure and the subsequent search).
POs may inspect a container w/in a car if they have PC to believe the container has contraband or evidence (even where POs do not have PC to search the entire car).
Where PC exists, the POs may search the entire vehicle including closed containers/luggage to find objects for which PC existed.
Warrantless search and seizure of items from a car may be justified under several scenarios:
(1) SILA
(2) plain view
(3) an inventory search following a lawful impounding
(4) a border search
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Automobile Exception, Automobile Checkpoint Stops
POs, operating at a checkpoint, may stop traffic to check the vehicle registration and DLs of drivers, as long as the stops:
(1) are random
(2) are based on some fixed formula, such as every vehicle or every 5th vehicle
–> Sobriety or drunk driving checkpoints are permissible
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Special Needs Doctrine
An exception to the general req of individualized suspicion of searches: warrantless, suspicion-less search may be justified when special needs (beyond the normal need for law enforcement) make the warrant and PC req impracticable.
–> POs are permitted to use checkpoints to conduct brief seizures and/or limited searches w/ no individualized suspicion/warrant in response to a public safety danger that cannot be addressed by complying with the normal individualized suspicion/warrant reqs.
If the ct finds that the primary purpose of a program of searches is a special need and not a general interest in crime control, the ct must conduct a context specific inquiry into the reasonableness of the program.
- -> Balancing test: weigh special interest against privacy interest advanced
(1) the nature of the privacy interest involved;
(2) the character and degree of the govt intrusion; and
(3) the nature and immediacy of the govt’s needs and the efficacy of the program in addressing those needs.
Must be based on a fixed formula that deprives individual officers of the discretion to select subjects.
–> Because a special needs stop is a seizure, if it is unreasonable (not based on special needs), any evidence it leads to will be tainted by the stop.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Plain View
POs may seize property that is clearly visible in plain view w/o a warrant if:
(1) POs are lawfully present at the place where the object can be seen;
(2) POs have a lawful right of access to the object; and
(3) it is immediately apparent that the object is incriminating.
- -> A PO may follow an arrestee into his house and then lawfully seize any contraband evidence in plain view.
- -> A PO may NOT move objects to get a better view.
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Consent
Consent is a warrantless intrusion reqing no justification; an individual may simply waive his 4A rights as long as the waiver is voluntary.
To justify search based on consent, POs must est 3 elements:
(1) voluntariness
(2) proper scope; and
(3) third party consent
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Consent, Voluntariness
To be effective, the D’s consent must be a voluntary and intelligent decision made w/o coercion.
–> Totality of the circumstances
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Consent, 3rd Party Consent
Person consenting must have either actual or apparent authority to consent, such as a person who:
(1) truly may consent (such as the owner or occupant of the particular premises); or
(2) has apparent authority to consent, such a having a key or knowing where things are on the premises (even if it later turns out that the person lacked actual authority to consent)
- -> Any person who has joint control or use of shared premises may consent to a valid search.
- -> A present co-tenant who is silent (and does not object) does not have standing to object to the reasonableness of the search.
- -> An absent co-tenant does not have any standing to object to the search (even where POs are responsible for co-tenant’s absence - detention or arrest).
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Searches Pursuant to a Stop
A stop is the momentary detention (often accompanied by very limited questioning) of a criminal suspect.
- -> May take place in the suspect’s home or car or on the street.
- -> A stop is a seizure w/in meaning of 4A; thus, seizure must be reasonable (depends on type of stop).
Types of Stops
- -> PC not required for short, investigatory stop (satisfied by RS)
- -> RS: cts must look at totality of circumstances to see whether PO had particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing
4A –> Warranted Actions: Exceptions to Warrant Requirement - Hot Pursuit
A warrantless search is lawful when POs are in actual hot pursuit of a fleeing suspect to apprehend him; POs may seize mere evidence as well as any contraband found.
