Exceptions to Warrant Requirement

Question 1

Warrant Requirements

Answer 1

1) oath/affirmation
2) neutral and detached Magistrate
3) particularity requirement

Steagald search warrant: authorizes police to search a home for a suspect who doesn’t own the property

Question 2

Exigent Circumstances

(1) Shots fired

Answer 2

(a) Mincey: warrantless search must end when exigency ends; scope of search determined by exigency

Question 3

Exigent Circumstances

(2) Hot pursuit of dangerous felon

Answer 3

(a) Warden: (armed suspect) Scope of valid search: places objectively capable of holding suspect/guns

Question 4

Exigent Circumstances
(3)	Destruction of ev

Answer 4

(a) Welsh: (DUI) gravity of underlying offence is important factor in determining if exigency exists
(b) King: Police-Created See drug dealPC (drug deal) + Ex Circum. (hot pursuit/or Destruction Ev)

Question 5

Exigent Circumstances

(4) Community caretaking

Answer 5

(a) Brigham City: Objectively reas basis to believe someone needs assistance (seriously injured or threatened w/ injury)?

Question 6

Plain View Doctrine

Answer 6

(1) Requirements:
(a) Police are lawfully in place where they can view item
(b) And are lawfully in place where they can gain custody over it
(c) Must be immediately apparent to police that item is subject to seizure

(2) Hicks: (police looking for shooter/check stereos for serial #) PC required for inspection of PV object

Question 7

Auto exception (Car Itself)

Answer 7

(a) Carroll: vehicle mobility = exigency; have PC for believing illegal object inside–>no warrant required
(b) Chambers: could’ve been searched on scene (illogical not to allow once in custody)

Question 8

Search Incident to Arrest (Scope)

Answer 8

(1) Scope: anything capable of holding ev or weapons

(2) Robinson: Search of person or effects on person con’l to rid of weapons (any (blades)) or discover ev even when no danger/chance of ev
(a) Riley: must always secure warrant to search contents of cellphone (Robinson does not extend)

(3) Chimel: SIA limited to individual’s person and area w/in immediate control (wingspan)
(4) Buie: Protective sweep of area (places where someone could be hiding)requires articulable suspicion

Question 9

Consent

Answer 9

(1) No PC required–>State must only prove that coercion was not expressed/implied–>TotC
(2) Bustamonte: police don’t have to warn of right to refuse consent. Actor can give “voluntary” consent even if they don’t know they have right to refuse

Question 10

Search Incident to Arrest (Vehicle)

Answer 10

Gant: may only do vehicle SIA if arrestee is unsecured or have reason to believe (not PC) ev of that crime

Question 11

3rd party consent

Answer 11

(a) reas. for police to believe person has apparent authority to consent?
(b) Randolph: search not allowed if there is refusal to consent by physically present resident, even if another consents

Question 12

Auto Exception: Containers

Answer 12

(a) Chadwick-Sanders: if PC extends to container in auto (treat Chadwick as if container was on street = still good law), must have warrant to search container (not to seize)

(b) Ross: if PC extends to car generally, can search containers w/o warrant

(c) Acevedo: (overrules Chadwick) if PC (for container or car generally), can search containers w/o warrant

(i) Houghton: w/ PC to search a car, can search passengers’ belongings if capable of concealing object