Criminal Procedure Flashcards
Govt. Action – 4th Amend.
Grants a person protection from unlawful government searches and seizures.
−Acts by private individuals are NOT protected.
Probable Cause
(1) trustworthy facts or knowledge,
(2) sufficient to warrant a reasonable person to believe,
(3) that the person committed a crime.
− Officer DOES NOT need firsthand knowledge (it may be based on informant’s information).
− An arrest in/at someone’s home requires a warrant (unless exigent circumstances).
Stop & Inquire
Police must have:
(1) a reasonable articulable suspicion,
(2) that criminal activity is afoot.
− Allows a brief detention for questioning.
Stop & Frisk
Police must have:
(1) a reasonable articulable suspicion,
(2) that criminal activity is afoot, and
(3) that the person has a weapon.
Plain Feel Doctrine
→during the frisk, police may only seize items reasonably believed to be contraband or a weapon.
Reasonable Suspicion
1) quantum of knowledge
2) sufficient to induce an ordinarily prudent and cautious person to believe
3) that criminal activity is at hand.
Warrant Requirement
– a warrant is required for all searches and seizures unless an exception applies.
A valid search warrant requires:
1) Probable cause – reliable info that evidence of illegality will be found;
2) It must state with particularity the place and items to be searched/seized; AND
3) Be issued by a neutral and detached magistrate.
Exigent Circumstances
– allows a warrantless search if:
a) evidence is evanescent (it will dissipate or disappear);
b) it’s necessary to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence;
c) the police are in hot pursuit of a felon and evidence is in plain view; OR
d) the emergency aid exception applies.
Miranda Rights
– attach when a suspect is in a custodial interrogation.
Custodial Interrogation
− Custody = the person reasonably believes they are not free to leave.
− Interrogation = police knew (or should have known) they were likely to elicit an incriminating response.
Statements / Acts Protected
– only protects statements and acts that are communicative or testimonial in nature.
− Crying is NOT a testimonial communication.
− Miranda rights DO NOT apply to spontaneous statements.
Public Safety Exception
– a limited interrogation without Miranda warnings IS ALLOWED when police ask questions reasonably prompted by a public safety concern or safety of the officer (i.e. to secure a weapon).
Invoking Miranda Rights
– it must be clear and unambiguous.
− Once invoked, police must stop ANY questioning. Additionally, D’s silence CANNOT be commented on at trial.
Police may reinitiate questioning if:
1) Suspect is re-advised of his Miranda rights;
2) Has provided a knowing and intelligent waiver; AND
3) Either
(a) counsel is present;
(b) suspect initiates the communication; or
(c) 14-days have passed since the suspect was released from custody.
Waiver of Rights
– a valid waiver must be made:
1) knowingly,
2) intelligently, AND
3) voluntarily.
− D must understand the nature of the right being waived and the consequence for waiving it.
Right to Counsel (6th Amend.)
– the accused has the right to counsel in ALL criminal prosecutions.
− Attaches→once formal adversarial judicial proceedings are commenced (formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, arraignment).
− Once rights attach, a suspect CANNOT be questioned without a lawyer, and anything said is inadmissible (unless a valid waiver occurs).
Right to Counsel (5th Amend.)
− Attaches when a suspect is in a custodial interrogation (Miranda rights).
− Suspect has the right to consult with an attorney and have one present during questioning.
Effective Assistance of Counsel (6th Amend.)
– D has the right to effective assistance of counsel.
− Includes the effective aid in preparation and trial of a criminal case.
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
– D must show:
1) Counsel’s performance was deficient; AND
2) But for the deficiency, the result would be different.
*If shown, the verdict MUST be reversed, and D is entitled to a new trial.
Line-Ups
Due Process Clause (14th Amend.)→violated when a line-up is (1) unnecessarily suggestive, (2) resulting in a substantial likelihood of misidentification.
If violated→identification is inadmissible at trial. Absent improper police influence, an out-of-court identification is ADMISSIBLE.
Independent Source Rule regarding lineups
→an in-court identification is admissible at trial (even if a line-up is tainted) when it’s:
1) based on a witness’s previous knowledge;
2) trustworthy; AND
3) based on a previous transaction (i.e. the crime).
Limitations on Miranda Violations
▪ Limitation #1→Not required to suppress the physical evidence found because of D’s statements (as long as statement was voluntary).
▪ Limitation #2→Subsequent statements made after Miranda warnings are admissible UNLESS a previous statement was obtained through the use of inherently coercive police tactics offensive to Due Process.
▪ Limitation #3→Statements in violation of Miranda may be used to impeach D on cross- examination.
Right to a Jury Trial – 6th Amend.
guarantees a criminal defendant the right to a jury trial for offenses where imprisonment is greater than 6 months.
− Minimum of 6 jurors is required, and a verdict MUST be unanimous.
− Any fact (other than a prior conviction) that increases the maximum penalty for a crime MUST be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Competence to Stand Trial
D is competent to stand trial if he has:
1) a sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer (able to assist in preparing a defense); AND
2) a rational and factual understanding of proceedings.
*D cannot be tried if deemed incompetent (but competence can be reassessed at a later date).
Burden of Proof
→ Prosecution MUST prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
− Burden of proof CANNOT be shifted to D.
− Making D prove affirmative defenses is allowed.
Presumptions for Jury Instructions
2 types:
− Rebuttable Presumption (one that may be disputed or overcome by additional evidence)→ violates the Due Process Clause if it shifts the burden of proof to D.
− Irrebuttable Presumption (one that cannot be disputed or overcome)→is a per se violation of the Due Process clause.
Sufficiency of Evidence
A court MUST enter a Judgment of Acquittal if the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction (when a reasonable jury would not find that each element was proven beyond a reasonable doubt).
− D may move for a Judgment of Acquittal either: (a) at the close of its case-in-chief; OR (b) after the close of all evidence.
Harmless Error Rule
– even if evidence is improperly admitted at trial, a guilty verdict will stand if the Prosecution can prove that the error was harmless (that D would have been convicted anyway).
Plea Bargains
A D may enter a plea bargain, but doing so waives his 6th Amendment right to a jury trial.
Requirements for a valid plea bargain:
1) Judge must determine plea is voluntarily and intelligently made; and
2) Judge must ensure that D understands:
a) Nature of the charge and its critical elements;
b) Maximum authorized penalty and any mandatory sentence;
c) That D has a right to plead not guilty; and
d) That D is waiving his right to a jury trial.
Appellate courts will not disturb valid pleas unless:
a) Plea was made involuntarily (includes misunderstanding);
b) The court that took the plea lacked jurisdiction;
c) D had ineffective assistance of counsel; or
d) The prosecutor failed to honor the plea.
Confrontation
D has a right to have adverse witnesses testify in-person and subject to cross-examination
Not required if:
1) Exclusion is necessary for public policy; and
2) Reliability of the testimony is otherwise assured.
(D can be removed from court for disruptive behavior)
Co-defendant confessions
a co-D’s confession implicating D is inadmissible against D at a joint jury trial (OK at bench trial).
Exceptions- confession of a co-D is admissible if either:
a) Confessing co-D testifies subject to cross-examination;
b) D’s have separate trials;
c) Confession is redacted so that all portions referring to the co-D are eliminated; or
d) Co-D’s confession is used to rebut D’s claim that his confession was obtained coercively.
Right to a Speedy Trial
The 6th Amendment guarantees D the right to a speedy trial.
Protects D from unreasonable delay between the time charges are filed and the beginning of trial.
Right attaches once D has been arrested or charged.
Right to Speedy Trial Violations
Determined by the totality of the circumstances.
Courts look at the following factors:
1) Length of delay;
2) Reason for delay (did D contribute to the delay?);
3) Whether D asserted his right to a speedy trial; and
4) Whether the delay has prejudiced D.
Remedy for violation = dismissal of case with prejudice.
Requirements for death penalty
1) Statute allowing death penalty must not be unconstitutionally vague;
2) Jury must be allowed to consider mitigating circumstances; and
3) There must be at least one “aggravating circumstance” (prior convictions) supporting the sentence.
5th vs 6th Amendment Right to Counsel
5th Amendment right to counsel:
Not Automatic- accused must invoke the right by unambiguously requesting presence of counsel (applies to any custodial interrogation)
Not offense-specific- once invoked, police must stop questioning on all subjects.
6th Amendment right to counsel:
Automatic- attached once charges have been filed and at all subsequent stages
Offense-specific- Police can question D about any other crimes.
Exceptions to the Search Warrant Requirement
1) Search incident to arrest;
2) Plain view search;
3) Automobile Search;
4) Valid consent to search;
5) Exigent circumstances; and
6) Stop & frisk.
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
4th Amendment only applies if a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy (REOP) regarding the thing or place searched and/or the items seized.
-Standing to challenge a government search requires a REOP.
-REOP is determined by the totality of the circumstances.
No REOP for inherently public things (handwriting, voice, location, odors, public records, things viewable form public space, garbage placed outside).
Automatic Standing- REOP always exists if D either:
a) Owns, has a right to possess, or lives on the premises to be searched; or
b) Is an overnight guest of the premises to be searched.
Requirements for a valid search warrant
1) Based on probable cause
-usually a police affidavit demonstrating probable cause that the search or seizure will produce evidence.
-Affidavits- must contain facts showing probable cause
-May include information from anonymous sources
-If based on false information, warrant is invalid.
2) Precise on its face- warrant must describe, with reasonable precision, the place to be searched and/or items to be seized.
3) Issued by a neutral and detached magistrate.
Good Faith Exception
Exclusionary rule does not apply if police act in good faith on an invalid search warrant.
-Exceptions to good-faith reliance- police cannot rely on a defective warrant obtained in good faith if:
a) Affidavit completely lacks probable cause (no reasonable police officer would have relied on it);
b) Warrant is defective on its face;
c) Police or government official lied or misled magistrate; or
d) Magistrate has “wholly abandoned her judicial role”
Search Incident to Lawful Arrest
Police may search a lawfully arrested person and his immediate surrounding area without a warrant.
Requirements:
1) Arrest must be lawful;
2) Search must be contemporaneous with the arrest; and
3) Search must be limited to the area within the suspect’s reach or movement (where he could obtain weapons or destroy evidence).
SILA Protective Sweeps
Police may sweep an area for officer safety or with reasonable belief that accomplices may be present.
SILA Inventory Search
Police may search arrestee’s belongings or seized property when jailing an arrested suspect.
SILA Automobiles
After arresting occupant, police may search the vehicle’s interior, including glove box, if at time of the search:
a) Arrestee is unsecured and may access the vehicle interior, or
b) They reasonably believe evidence of the crime for which the arrest was made may be found in vehicle.
-Police cannot search trunk without probable cause or consent
-Breathalyzer- a warrantless breathalyzer test is valid following a lawful arrest based on probable cause of drunk driving.
May not search digital information on a phone seized during an arrest without a warrant.
Plain View Searches
Police may seize evidence without a warrant if:
(1) it is observed in plain view (with any of the five senses),
(2) from a place the officer is lawfully permitted to be (e.g. a warrant exception applies), AND
(3) probable cause exists to believe that the items are evidence of a crime or contraband (it must be immediately apparent).
Consent to Search
Requirements for valid consent:
1) Voluntarily and intelligently made
-Police cannot falsely claim legal cause to search
-Police have no obligation to inform suspects that they have a right to refuse consent;
2) Person giving consent has authority to consent
-Authority to consent must be reasonably apparent.
Scope of Consent
Can be limited by consenting party.
-Violation of scope renders the entire search non-consenting.
Third-party Consent
allowed if there is authority to consent.
-Where multiple people have property rights, any single one can consent to the search of any area where they have authority to consent.
-A resident’s right to consent trumps a non-resident (tenant over landlord)
-Scope of consent is dictated by the person present with the highest authority to consent.
(No consent if two persons with equal right to possession disagree on consent).
Public School Searches
To conduct a search, school officials must have reasonable grounds to believe the search is necessary (less burdensome than probable cause).
School search is reasonable if:
1) Search offers a moderate chance of finding evidence of wrongdoing;
2) Procedure for searching is reasonably related to the objectives of the search; and
3) Search is not excessively intrusive.
Drug tests- random urinalysis permitted for public school students participating in extracurricular activities.
Warrant requirements for electronic surveillance:
1) Probable cause that a specific crime is being or has been committed;
2) Warrant must name suspects subject to surveillance;
3) Warrant must describe with particularity the subject of conversations that can be surveilled;
4) Surveillance must be limited to short periods of time; and
5) Surveillance must terminate when desired information is obtained and must be turned over to the court.
Exclusionary Rule
Prohibits the introduction of evidence obtained in violation of D’s constitutional rights in a criminal trial.
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine
Evidence derived or obtained from illegal government conduct is excludable against D.
-Arises when illegal police action leads to evidence.
Exclusionary Rule Exceptions (“break the chain”)
illegally obtained evidence is admissible if government can “break the chain” between the illegal government conduct and the seized evidence;
Common ways to break the chain:
1) Independent source- government had an independent source for obtaining the evidence (independent from the original illegality;
2) Inevitable discovery- government would have discovered illegally derived evidence even without illegal conduct;
3) Attenuation- where evidence challenged is too remote and attenuated from unlawful search or seizure
-Includes intervening acts of free will by D (after initial illegality, D consciously leads police to the evidence).
Limitations on the Exclusionary Rule
Does not apply to:
1) Grand Jury Proceedings, civil proceedings, parole hearings, or administrative cases;
2) Violations of the “knock and announce” rule; or
3) Evidence seized as a result of Miranda violations.
May be used to impeach D’s testimony.
When Jeopardy Attaches
Jury trial- once jury is impanelled and sworn in.
Bench trial- once the first witness is sworn in.
Double Jeopardy: Exceptions Permitting Retrial
Once Jeopardy has attached, retrial is allowed if either:
a) Hung jury;
b) Mistrial due to manifest necessity
(occurs when D’s original trial is aborted for some reason (D is too ill to continue));
c) Retrial after successful appeal by D
(D can be retried unless the basis for reversal was insufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict);
d) D breaches a plea bargain agreement;
e) Separate sovereigns
-D can be tried for the same crime in different states
-D can be tried for the same crime in federal and state court.
Double Jeopardy
Prevents a D from being prosecuted twice for the “same offense”.
− Under Blockburger Test→two crimes are NOT the “same offense” if each crime requires proof of a fact which the other does not.
− A final judgment on a lesser offense bars prosecution of a greater offense on the same facts UNLESS the greater offense: (a) did not exist at the time of trial; OR (b) was not discovered despite due diligence.
Good Faith Defense:
a) A reasonably relied upon but defective search warrant; or
b) A judicial opinion or statute that was later changed or declared invalid.
