Constitutional Protection of Accused Persons Flashcards
(24 cards)
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, the government may not intrude upon that privacy unless they have a valid search warrant. Under the 4A, a search and seizure of a person or place must be accompanied by probable cause and a warrant unless a warrant exception applies. Evidence obtained in violation of this will be excluded under the exclusionary rule.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
The Exclusionary Rule
Essentially, knowledge gained through the government’s own wrongs (illegally searching and seizing) cannot be used. This rule applies directly and indirectly to evidence discovered by unconstitutional police conduct (“fruit of the poisonous tree”).
Does not apply to federal habeas corpus review, grand jury proceedings, preliminary/bail/sentencing hearings, proceedings to revoke parole, evidence used as impeachment evidence against the defendant, or civil proceedings.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Good Faith
When officers act in good faith, the evidence should not be excluded but if they know the information was false, then it should be excluded because the exclusionary rule is to stop police illegality
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Probable Cause + Warrant Requirement + Knock and Announce
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Katz Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
If a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, then a search has been conducted (Katz). Katz two-prong test includes: (1) whether there was a subjective expectation of privacy, and (2) whether there was an objective expectation of privacy. So, a search occurs when the government intrudes upon a private citizen’s sincerely held, objectively reasonable expectation of privacy.
We know that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in open fields, dog sniffs, information knowingly exposed to the public, nor information a person knowingly turns over to third parties (like phone records).
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 1: Automobile Exception
If a car is readily mobile and probable cause exists to believe it contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment permits police to search the vehicle without more information. This includes the trunk if there is probable cause to believe evidence is in the trunk.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 2: Search Incident to Arrest
When an arrest is made, an officer may search the arrestee and the area of immediate control of the arrestee. The bright line rule is that a search of an arrested individual is reasonable because the arrest gives rise to the authority to search. The rationale for this rule is to protect officer safety and to persevere evidence. Further, officers, as a precautionary matter, can look into spaces immediately adjoining the place of arrest from which an attack could immediately be launched.
Upon a lawful arrest, officers may also inspect the physical attributes of the arrestee’s cell phone, but this does not extend to the contents of the arrestee’s cell phone because such a search implicates greater individual privacy interests than a brief physical search.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 3: Plain View
The plain view doctrine states that it is permissible to seize evidence of wrong-doing that is found during a lawful government search even if the item is not on the warrant. The requirements for this doctrine are: lawfully in position to view the object, incriminating character of object must be immediately apparent, and lawful right of access to the object.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 4: Administrative Searches
Officers can search arrestees and impounded vehicles, public school officials can search students and their personal effects (backpack, purse, lockers) upon reasonable suspicion, and random drug testing is permitted for public school children involved in any extracuriccular activity.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 5: Consent
The police may conduct a valid, warrantless search if they have voluntary consent to do so. Consent must be voluntary. Voluntariness is based on the totality of the circumstances and considers things such as the defendant’s characteristics (age, etc.) and the nature of the surrounding circumstances (length of stop, questioning, etc). The prosecution only has to prove that the consent was voluntary, and not the result of duress or coercion, express or implied.
If one with actual or apparent authority to consent gives consent voluntarily, officers may search the areas to which they understand the consent to extend. A co-tenant can consent to search of areas over which he has control, but other co-tenants who are present may revoke the consent.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 6: Exigent Circumstances
Some exigencies make the needs of law enforcement so compelling that a warrantless search is objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. The exigent circumstances exception requires that officers have probable cause that an exigent circumstance exists AND probable cause to enter the premises distinct from the exigency itself. The types of exigent circumstances are as follows: hot pursuit, public officer/safety, and destruction of evidence.
Arrest, Search, and Seizure
Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 7: Terry Stop and Frisk
A Terry stop is a temporary detention and seizure to further inquire about an officer’s reasonable suspicions that criminal activity is afoot to either confirm or dispel his suspicions. Reasonable suspicion must be more that a hunch. In such circumstances, if the officer also reasonably believes that the person may be armed or presently dangerous, she may conduct a protective frisk. She may also conduct a frisk of the vehicle if there is a reasonable belief that there is a weapon in the car.
A police officer may stop a person without probable cause to arrest if she has a reasonable suspicion of a criminal activity.
A police officer can only frisk for weapons.
Confessions and Privilege Against Self-Incrimination
Confessions and Privilege Against Self-Incrimination
Under the 5A, a defendant has a right to counsel when he is in custody and subject to interrogation. The privilege against self-incrimination bars a state from compelling a person to provide evidence of a testimonial or communicative nature. Evidence is testimonial or communicative when it reveals a person’s subjective knowledge or thought processes. The following are required: the defendant MUST be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.
Confessions and Privilege Against Self-Incrimination
Confessions and Privilege Against Self-Incrimination - Custody and Waiver
Miranda is triggered when there is custodial interrogation. Custody is defined as a coercive environment or a police dominated atmosphere. If the individual indicates, in any manner, at any time prior to or during questioning, that he wishses to consult with a lawyer, the interrogation must cease. One exception to Miranda warnings is a threat to public safety. In addition, a suspect may waive the 5A privilege, provided the waiver is made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.
Lineups and Other Forms of Identification
Lineups
A lineup is a police identification procedure in which in the suspect in a crime is exhibited, along with others with similar physical characteristics, before the victim or witness to determine if the suspect committed the offense. The role of a lawyer during a lineup is to make sure the procedure is fair, but the lawyer is not allowed to control the proceedings.
Right to Counsel
Right to Counsel
To invoke the right to counsel under the Fifth Amendment, a suspect must make a specific, unambiguous statement asserting her desire to have counsel present. If a suspect makes an ambiguous statement regarding the right to counsel, the police are not required to end the interrogation or to clarify whether the suspect wants to invoke the right. However, once that right to counsel is invoked, all interrogation must cease until counsel is present.
Sixth Amendment
Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel
The Sixth Amendment only applies after a prosecution has formally commenced, is offense specific, must be invoked, and can be waived. The Sixth Amendment right has to attach after a formal adversary proceeding has begun, and initial appearance before a judicial officer, where he learns the charges against him and his liberty is subject to restriction, marks the start of adversary judicial proceedings that trigger attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Prosecution violates the Sixth Amendment when they deliberately elicit information without counsel present (if the right to counsel has already been attached).
Offense Specific: This applies only to the crime charged in this specific instance, but not to other crimes.
This right only exists for post-charge lineup and show-ups, but not photo identifications, finger printing, or other forms of identification. There is also no right to counsel for a pre-charge lineup.
Fair Trial and Guilty Pleas
Fair Trial
Accused individuals also have a right to a fair trial and are presumed innocent until proven guilty. At trial, the defendant is presumed innocent and may demand the government prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Due process is violated if the trial is conducted in a manner making it unlikely that the jury gave the evidence reasonable consdieration, or the state compels the defendant to stand trial in prison clothing, or the state compels the defendant to be visibly shackled at trial unless justified, etc.
Fair Trial and Guilty Pleas
Guilty Pleas
Defendant may choose to plead guilty instead of going to trial. The defenadnt may withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing at any time. If sentencing has taken place, the defendant must show a fair and just reason to withdraw it (counsel was ineffective, the plea was involuntary, the prosecutor did not act as promised, or the wrong court heard the plea).
Doubel Jeopardy
Double Jeopardy
The DJ Clause protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and multiple punishments for the same offense. If one offense could be committed without the other, no DJ would apply. Jeopardy attaches when the jury is impaneled and sworn in a jury trial or when the first witness is sworn in a bench trial.
“Same offense”: if each crime contains an element that the other does not, they are not considered to be the “same offense.”
The DJ Clause does not prevent re-prosecution when the prosecution is conducted by different sovereigns (the state and federal government, or different states).
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The 8A prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, which applies to inherently cruel punishment such as torture and execution by painful and lingering methods. It also prohibits punishments that are disproportionate (excessive) to the crime.
Defendants who cannot be given the death penalty:
1. Those with an intellectual disability
2. Thos who are insane at the time the execution is set
3. Those who were minors when they committed the crime
4. Those who rape a person if the victim did not die
5. Those who are convicted of felony murder but neither took life, attempted to take life, nor intended to take life (like the getaway driver).
Burdens of Proof and Persuasion
Burdens of Proof and Persuasion
A party is obligated to produce the degree of evidence required to prove the facts upon which the party relies. Burden of proof includes the standard of proof, burden of persuasion, and burden of production. A party satisfies the burden of going forward with the evidence by introducing legally sufficient evidence on the issue from which a reasonable jury could infer the fact alleged from the circumstances proved.
THE PROSECUTION must prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Appeal and Error
Appeal and Error
If convicted at trial, the defendant will proceed to a sentencing hearing and may file motions to overturn the conviction, or for a new trial, or for re-sentencing. Thereafter, he may appeal. Under the plain error rule, an appeals court may reverse a judgment and order a new trial because of a serious mistake in the proceedings.
D must demonstrate an error was made at trial:
1. A plain error is one that affects his substantial rights and is appealable even if not objected to during trial
2. A harmless error will not serve to overturn a verdict. The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless.
Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment
This applies when police engage in coercive conduct that overcomes the suspect’s will. An involuntary confession and “fruits” are not admissible for any purpose.
