Criminal Procedure

Question 1

Seizure

Answer 1

A person has been seized if, in light of all of the circumstances, “a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave.”

Student has a Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizure. However, this Fourth Amendment right was violated in this case only if: (a) Student was in fact “seized” by the police when they spoke with him in the manager’s office, and (b) that seizure was unreasonable for Fourth Amendment purposes.

Question 2

Terry Stop

Answer 2

the Fourth Amendment permits detention of an individual for a relatively brief period of time if the police have a “reasonable articulable suspicion” that the individual in ques-tion has been recently involved in criminal activity. Terry v. Ohio

Question 3

Custody

Answer 3

Custody is a substantial seizure and is defined as either a formal arrest or “restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest.” New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 655 (1984). A suspect need not be in a police station to be in custody. Whether a suspect is in custody is determined by “how a reasonable person in the suspect’s situation would perceive his circumstances.”

Question 4

Voluntariness of a Confession

Answer 4

The voluntariness of a confession is based on (1) whether the police subjected the suspect to coercive conduct, see Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 167 (1986), and (2) whether the conduct was sufficient to overcome the will of the suspect (TOC analysis)

Mere trickery is not sufficient, the police may pressure, cajole, and conceal material facts and actively mislead.

Question 5

Double Jeopardy

Answer 5

Changes are multiplicitous and improper on double jeopardy grounds if the prosecution must necessarily prove the elements of one crime in order to prove the
elements of a second crime. All the elements of the “lesser included offense” must be contained in the “greater

Question 6

Presumptions in a Criminal Case

Answer 6

The prosecution is required to prove every element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt. Juries are not allowed to presume the presence of intent merely from the fact that the prosecution has proved other elements, but may infer intent from the circumstances of the crime.

Question 7

Increasing a Punishment Away from the Jury

Answer 7

all facts that increase the maximum sentence a defendant can face for a crime other than the fact of a previous conviction must be pleaded and proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury.

Question 8

Right to Counsel

Answer 8

The Sixth Amendment, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, provides that
“[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” The right to counsel does not attach with respect to particular charges until formal adversarial judicial proceedings have commenced (i.e., “at or after the initiation of adversary judicial criminal proceedings—whether by way of formal charge, preliminary hearing,
indictment, information, or arraignment [or in some states, arrest warrant], Once a suspect’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel has attached, any attempts to “deliberately elicit” statements from him in the absence of his attorney violate the Sixth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is charge- or offense-specific. Representation by
counsel in one prosecution does not, in itself, guarantee counsel for uncharged offenses.

Question 9

When a suspect invokes right to counsel during a custodial interrogation

Answer 9

When a suspect invokes his right to counsel during an interrogation, law enforcement must immediately cease all questioning. See Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 484–85 (1981). Custodial interrogation
cannot be reinitiated unless and until the suspect has been re-advised of his Miranda rights, has
provided a knowing and voluntary waiver, and (1) counsel is present and (2) the suspect himself
initiated further communication with the police, see id. at 484, or (3) (if the suspect was released
from custody after the initial interrogation) at least 14 days have passed.

Question 10

Valid Miranda Waiver

Answer 10

A valid waiver of Miranda rights must be “voluntary”—i.e., the product of a free or deliberate
choice rather than intimidation, coercion, or deception. Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370,
382–83 (2010). In addition, the waiver must be knowing and intelligent. That is, it “must have
been made with a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the
consequences of the decision to abandon it.”