Exceptions to Warrant Requirements Flashcards
3 exigent circumstances
1) emergency aid (Brigham City)
2) hot pursuit (Warren)
3) need to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence (King)
Kentucky v. King
Law enforcement may conduct a warrantless search if it is compelling that a warrantless search is objectively reasonable
Prevention of evidence is fundamental
Search Incident to Arrest
When an arrest is made, it reasonable for the arresting officer to search the person for weapons that would allow the arrestee the ability to escape one place where there would be a weapon
Prevent the destruction of evidence
Look to the person, not the entire area around them
Chimel v. California
The entire house of an arrestee cannot be searched, only their personal area near them where evidence or weapons could be
Robinson v. United States
Search of a cigarette holder, inside the arrestee’s pocket, because the probable cause to justify the arrest warrant was enough to justify the additional intrusion on the person
Exception incident to arrest
Cell phones are not a part of the incident to arrest unless a dire situation (bomb, child abduction, extreme emergency)
Per Riley
Riley v. California
Did not extend Robinson container rule to cell phones because of the amount of privacy in cell phones
No safety rationale for a cell phone search, and no immediate evidence is on the brink of destruction
Automobiles Incident to Arrest (Belton)
When a police officer makes a lawful arrest of an occupant of a car, he may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle incident to arrest
Not within reach per Chimel, but under the arrestee’s control
Automobiles Incident to the Arrest (Gant)
Overturned Belton
Police can only search a vehicle of the recent arrestee’s vehicle when:
1) the arrestee is unsecured within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the tie of the search
2) when there is reason to believe evidence RELEVANT TO THE CRIME OF THE ARREST might be found
Key Part of Arizona v. Gant
Reason to believe that evidence RELEVANT TO THE CRIE OF THE ARREST
Unsecure
Arizona v. Gant
Driver arrested for driving while suspended and searched the compartment of the car
This was no closeness at the time of arrest and the evidence was not related to the arrest
Are pretextual stops permitted with no motivation?
According to Whren, yes
Whren v. United States
The subjective state of mind of a police officer is not a factor in determining the reasonableness of a traffic stop objectively supported by probable cause
Defendant wanted an argument about the motive being race related - court said that is an equal protection 14th amendment issue
Automobile Warrant Exception
Cars generally do not have a warrant requirement because of the idea of mobility
Chambers v. Maroney
A warrantless search can occur if a car goes from the place of stop to a police station so long as there was an initial probable cause to believe that the car has items in the officers can seize
Big focus on mobility
United States v. Carroll
Held that there is a key difference between cars and homes in terms of privacy because of their traveling on the public roads
California v. Carney
An RV is not a home because of its mobility, even if it is where someone lives
Look to whether there is electricity, built in, and locked down
U.S. v. Chadwick
A warrantless search of locked luggage is unreasonable because it has more privacy than a typical container
Need another warrant for the locked luggage
California v. Acevedo
Reversed Chadwick
The fourth Amendment allows for the search of containers in a car as long as there is probable cause that the container has contraband in it
Plain view doctrine is a ___________ exception
seizure
Plain view doctrine elements
1) Officers were lawfully present
2) Items are in plain view
3) Immediately apparent that the item is contraband or the fruit of a crime (probable cause per Hicks)
4) Allows for the seizure of the item
Horton v. California
Items seized during a legal warrant that were immediately apparent and clearly contraband
Arizona v. Hicks
For PVD to apply, it can be only invoked if the police have probable cause of evidence’s incriminating character
Cannot further inspect the items by moving them closer, only can gather information in plain view
Plain touch doctrine
Police performing a Terry stop for weapons may NOT seize detected contraband during the search if it is not immediately apparent
Minnesota v. Dickerson
Plain touch doctrine case
Consent
allows for a search, without probable cause or a warrant, to occur
Schneckloth v. Bustamante
Consent must be voluntary, but not required to prove that the consent is knowing
The prosecution has to prove voluntariness, not knowledge of it
Consent goes beyond the need for a warrant
Georgia v. Randolph
People cannot search a home without a warrant if they obtain consent from one occupant, but another occupant objects
Illinois v. Rodriguez
A warrantless search into a place where police believe someone can consent to a search is permitted
Standard is objective - what are the facts at the time that would permit a person of a reasonable caution is
Consent and knowledge
Not required, but must be voluntary
Can police search a home when one consents and one does not?
No
