SEARCH AND SEIZURE PERSONS Flashcards
According to the fourth amendment both the United States and the California constitutions prohibit what
Both the sea United States in California Constitution prohibits unreasonable search and seizures of people houses and personal property
The right of people to be secure in their houses person’s papers and effects against unreasonable search and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue but upon what supported by oath or affirmation
Probable cause is used to support the oath or affirmation particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized
When does a search occur according to the fourth amendment
Search occurs when a government officer or infringes upon an expectation of privacy that society considers reasonable
When does a seizure of property occur?
A seizure of property occurs when there were some meaningful interference with an individual possessory interest in that
When does a seizure of a person occur 2 circumstances
He seizure of the person occurs one when I peace officer physically applies for us to win a person voluntarily submit to the officer authority
When is the fourth amendment consider violated
Fourth amendment is not violated unless a legitimate expectation of privacy is infringed
Does the fourth amendment mandate that police upsers act flawlessly?
The fourth amendment does not mandate that police officer’s at flawlessly but only that they act reasonably
Regarding the exclusionary rule what must a defendant prove to bring the motion to court to challenge a search or seizure of an item
The defendant must prove that he had standing to bring the motion by proving a sufficient privacy interest in the place search or the item seized
Based on evidence presented at a suppression hearing the court must make what determination?
The court must decide whether the officer was acting reasonable or unreasonable
What is the purpose of the exclusionary rule?
The purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter improper police conduct.
What are the two additional considerations before the exclusionary rule will be invoked?
First is whether the evidence was obtained as a result of exploitation of the illegal police conduct
second is whether the evidence would have been legally discovered anyway.
Does the exclusionary rule apply to evidence of criminal conduct or testimony of an officers observations of criminal conduct during an unlawful detention?
The exclusionary rule does not apply to evidence of criminal conduct or testimony of an officers observation of criminal conduct during unlawful detention the person detained illegally is not immunized from prosecution for any crime committed during the illegal detention.
Does the exclusionary rule apply to criminal and civil actions?
The exclusionary rule applies to criminal actions it extends to civil proceedings only where the proceedings so closely identified with criminal proceedings that they are quasi criminal in nature.
What did proposition 8 exclude?
Proposition eight eliminated California’s independent state grounds as a basis for excluding evidence.
According to proposition eight when is evidence admissible in court?
Evidence is admissible in court as long as the police do not violate the fourth ,sixth ,or 14th amendment when obtaining evidence or the constitutionally base procedures in Maranda.
According to proposition eight are or sworn peace officers obliged to uphold California’s independent rights?
Yes
What must a defendant established to move a case for suppression of evidence?
A defendant must establish standing to move for the suppression of evidence
What is “Standing”?
“Standing” is more accurately viewed as a question of privacy means that a defendant my show the illegal search and seizure invaded his or her own personal reasonable and legitimate expectation of privacy
Is a defendant entitled to claim another persons Maranda fifth or sixth amendment rights were violated?
No, A defendant is not entitled to claim that some other persons Maranda fifth or sixth amendment rights were violated
Who bears the burden to show a legitimate expectation of privacy regarding standing
The defendant bears the burden of showing a legitimate expectation of privacy
If a defendant admits ownership and later changes his story at trial what is the risk for the defendant?
The defendant risks being impeached by his earlier testimony
What are the factors to be considered regarding establishing standing?
Number one whether the defendant has a property or possessory interest in the things siezed or place searched.
Number two: whether he has the right to exclude others from that place
Number three: whether he has exhibited a subjective expectation that it would remain free from governmental invasion
Number 4: whether he took normal precautions to maintain privacy
Number 5: whether he was legitimately on the premises.
Does a person who is merely present in a hotel room that is rented to another have standing to question the validity of the police entry?
No a person who is merely present blacks standing to question the validity of the police entry.
Does a person who has rented a room with a stolen credit card have standing to contest entry by police including compliance with Knockin notice?
A person who has rented a room with a stolen credit card lax standing to contest entry.
