Criminal Procedure Flashcards
Acquittal
Acquittal will be granted only if the evidence presented in the prosecutor’s case-in-chief was so insufficient that NO reasonable jury could conclude that guilt is a rational outcome.
Standard of Proof — Whether the evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, supports a rational finding that all elements of the crime have been established.
4th Amendment, in General
Protects from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government in areas in which the complaining individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Probable Cause for a Warrant (Presumption)
When police act pursuant to a warrant based on probable cause, their actions are presumptively reasonable. This presumption is rebutted if the defendant can show that there was a warrant defect or a defect in the warrant process.
Seizure
Seizure of Property: A government action that results in a “meaningful interference” with a possessory interest.
Seizure of People: If a reasonable person would not feel free to leave, that person has been seized. Can be via a show of force or authority.
Search
The 4th Amendment governs searches that occur when police seek to find evidence and physically trespass on one’s person, papers, home, or effects to do so, or intrudes onto a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy.
Open Fields
Any private property beyond the curtilage of the home is not protected by the 4th Amendment.
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
Requires:
- ∆ must manifest a subjective expectation of privacy by making an effort to shield from the public; and
- That expectation must also be objectively reasonable.
If an item is exposed to a 3rd party, like a cell phone provider, that is considered exposed to the public and there is no expectation of privacy. (Examples: Bank records, conversations with a “false friend”, pen registers, aerial photography, abandoned property, etc.)
Use of Animals/Enhancing the Senses
The use of sensory enhancements does not transform a non-search into a search because there is no legitimate expectation of privacy.
However, it is a search if you use the dog/sense-enhancer by bringing it onto the curtilage of one’s home.
Invalidating a Warrant
To establish that a warrant is invalid, ∆ must prove that:
- The warrant was not based on probable cause;
- The magistrate was not neutral/detached;
- The warrant was too general (“failed to describe with particularity”); or
- The affidavit supporting the warrant was so lacking in probable cause that no rookie officer should/would have trusted it.
Excluding Evidence from an Invalid Warrant
To exclude evidence obtained under an invalid warrant, ∆ must prove that (1) the warrant was invalid, and (2) that the good faith exception of the exclusionary rule is not applicable.
Warrant Execution
Warrant executions that “shocks the conscious” are unreasonable. Example: a warrant to retrieve a bullet embedded in someone’s body.
“Knock and Announce” Rule
There is a presumption that the police must knock and announce their identity before entering a home to execute a warrant. However, knock-and-announce is NOT required when police have a reasonable suspicion that doing so will endanger the officers, lead to destruction of evidence, or flight of the suspect.
Violating the knock and announce rule does NOT result in exclusion of evidence.
Terry Frisk/Search
A cursory protective search for weapons or anything that might create imminent danger. A terry frisk/search is permitted without a warrant as long as there is reasonable suspicion that they are armed and dangerous.
Frisk is limited to the patting down of the outer clothing. Police can then seize anything they believe is contraband via the “plain touch” variant of the plain view doctrine. Scope of the search is limited to protection/ruling out the risk of a weapon.
Administrative Searches
Also known as “agency compliance” inspections, to determine compliance with health/safety/administrative codes and regulations.
No warrant is required for administrative searches, but there must be reasonable suspicion.
Includes airport screenings.
Special Needs Doctrine
The police can perform warrantless/suspicion-less limited searches to protect the public from a serious immediate danger. The purpose of the search must be for public safety, and not to produce evidence.
Police can seize evidence found in a special needs search if it is in plain view and the primary purpose was truly to address a specific threat and not to find evidence.
Examples: sobriety checkpoints, searches for escaped inmates, counter-terrorism protections, drug testing pilots, etc.
Bases for Challenging the Constitutionality of a Confession
4 ways of proving that a confession was given on unconstitutional grounds:
- If it was coerced in violation of Due Process rights.
- If it violates the privilege against self-incrimination and/or Miranda rights.
- If it violates the 6th Amendment right to counsel.
- If it was procured as fruit of the poisonous tree (came from an unlawful arrest).
Coercion
When government conduct “overbears the free will” of a ∆, the statement is considered involuntary and is inadmissible for any purpose, including impeachment.
Whether a statement was coerced depends on the totality of the circumstances, including —
- The ∆’s age, education, intelligence, etc.
- The location, duration, physical conditions of the interrogations.
- The amount of officers present.
- Whether trickery/deceptions was used by the police (not enough alone).
Coercion is usually found where there is a threat of injury, use of physical force, or relentless psychological pressure.
Governed by 14th Amendment Due Process.
5th Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination
“No person shall be compelled in a criminal case to be a witness against themselves.”
A person has absolute privilege under the 5th Amendment when 3 elements are met:
1. The government questioned the ∆ in any context;
2. There was a real and substantial fear that testimony will result in self-incrimination; and
3. There was an assertion of privilege by refusing to testify.
Applies only to testimonial evidence. (Not DN, hair, fingerprints, etc.)
Attachment of Miranda Rights and Consequences of Violation
Statements obtained during custodial interrogation in the absence of the proper Miranda warnings and waiver are inadmissible in the prosecution’s case-in-chief. (Are admissible in impeachment)
Miranda warnings/rights are triggered by police custody + interrogation.
“Custody” = When a reasonable/objective person would believe that their freedom has been deprived.
“Interrogation” = If a reasonable officer would anticipate that words/actions are likely to elicit an incriminating response.
Invocation of Miranda Rights
Miranda rights are triggered upon police custody + interrogation, and require an unambiguous and unequivocal statement invoking either the right to silence or the right to counsel.
Remaining silent does not constitute a waiver and the police may continue to speak with the ∆.
Post-invocation, the police must stop questioning.
Waiver of Miranda Rights
The ∆ must make a knowing and voluntary waiver, otherwise Miranda prohibits using the statements procured in interrogation. A valid waiver is evidence that the subsequent confession/statements were voluntary and in compliance with Due Process.
To establish a waiver, there must have been a showing that:
1. ∆ understood their rights orally or as written; and
2. ∆ made a voluntary decision to waive them.
Prolonged silence may be evidence of understanding the right.
Undercover Officers
Undercover questioning does not trigger Miranda warnings. However, be on the look out for 6th Amendment right to counsel protections.
6th Amendment Right to Counsel
The 6th Amendment right to counsel is triggered upon the initiation of the “formal adversarial process”. (Initiation includes formal charges, indictment, arraignment, preliminary hearings, etc.)
Under the 6th Amendment a ∆ has the right to counsel during all “critical stages” of prosecution, including physical identification proceedings, trial, etc.
Offense-specific.
The 6th Amendment RTC only applies once a suspect actually becomes a ∆, unlike Miranda!
6th Amendment Protections
- The right to a public trial,
- The right to a speedy trial,
- The right to a assistance of counsel,
- The right to an impartial jury, and
- The right to know who your accusers are (the Confrontation Clause).
Miranda Warnings
- The right to remain silent;
- Anything said can be used against them in court;
- They are entitled to the presence of an attorney; and
- That if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided.
3 Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule
- Independent Evidence
- Attenuation
- Inevitable Discovery
NOTE: The exclusionary rule is not applicable in grand jury proceedings
Grounds for Challenging Admissibility of Identification Evidence
- Violated Due Process, or
- Violated the Right to Counsel under the 6th Amendment (doesn’t apply to photo arrays where the ∆ isn’t present)
Due Process Standard for Challenging Identifications
Applies to all types of identifications at all stages.
Rule: If the ∆ can prove that the identification process was so unnecessarily suggestive that it created an irreparable risk of mistaken ID, the procedure violates Due Process and is inadmissible.
The ultimate question is reliability.
Exceptions to be made where inherently suggestive procedures may be necessary under the circumstances (i.e., the witness is about to die).
Grand Jury
Grand juries are not required for states, although most states choose to implement them.
Grand juries are required to federal cases for any charge with at least a 6 month penalty.
They are not an adversarial hearing, only an investigatory tool. Therefore, the “target” has no right to be present and no right to counsel.
Right to a Speedy Trial
Assessed by a totality of the circumstances. ∆ must prove that the delay caused them prejudice, which could include anxiety, oppressive, pre-trial incarceration, or degradation of evidence.
Length — More than one year will trigger an inquiry, but any ∆-requested delays are deduced from the calculation. The clock starts at the time of arrest or charge.
Reason — If the prosecution has no control over the delay, it may be a good reason, and the case will not be dismissed for violation.
Demand — A demand for a speedy trial is not required, but if the ∆ doesn’t make a demand, a court may infer that they are not objecting.
The only remedy is dismissal with prejudice.
6th Amendment