Criminal Due Process Final Short Answers

Question 1

List and explain 3 differences between the 5th and the 6th amendments

Answer 1

1. 5th: right only applies once the suspect is in custody vs 6th: custody does not apply
2. 5th: applies when the suspect is interrogated (direct questioning and/or its functional equivalent) vs. 6th: applies only to deliberate elicitation—was the officer trying to get an incriminating response
3. 5th: does not apply to undercover agents vs. 6th: applies to deliberate elicitation by undercover agents

Question 2

The court in Carney stated 2 reasons for the motor vehicle exception, list and explain them both

Answer 2

1. Inherent mobility—the vehicle is always moveable even if there’s no one in it
2. A reduced expectation of privacy—pervasively regulated by govt (license, taxes, inspection stickers, etc.)

Question 3

List and explain the 2 criteria used in evaluating whether or not Miranda warnings are required. Use case names and provide examples (examples can be from the case names)

Answer 3

1. In custody—a person does not feel free to leave, and freedom of movement restricted in some way
   Mendenhall—comfortable nature of the exchange
   = no custody
2. Interrogation—direct questioning (did you do it) and/or its functional equivalent (FE; officer words or actions that are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response)
   Innis—officers made off-hand remarks that they
   did not know would elicit an incriminating
   response

Question 4

List and explain the 4 general rules regarding exigency exceptions. Use examples where you can (part of the explanation)

Answer 4

1. Police act without a warrant because they believe a suspect will flee or evidence will be destroyed (does not need an explanation)
2. Still need PC (does not need an explanation)
3. Warrantless action ends when exigency ends—Hayden was an armed robber and they fund Hayden but not the weapon, exigency has not ended
4. Exigency limits the scope of the search—looking for a person, you can’t look in the microwave

Question 5

List and explain the 3 prerequisites necessary before there is a lawful plain-view seizure

Answer 5

1. Lawful vantage point—the officer cannot violate the 4th A when he/she sees the item in question
2. Right to physical access—the officer in Hicks did not have the right to physical access when he lifted up the stereo and turned it over to see the serial number
3. Immediately apparent as illegal—the officer has to know it’s illegal by sight

Question 6

The court delineated a 2-part test for probable cause in Aguilar; list and explain the 2 parts. Discuss how if at Spinelli and/or Gates affect that test

Answer 6

• 2-part Aguilar test:
  
  1. Basis of knowledge—officers need to provide
     underlying circumstances as to how they got the
     information
  2. Credibility, veracity, and reliability of informant—
     they’ve been used as a CI before and have
     provided credible evidence
• Spinelli added self-verifying detail if either one of the 2 parts has a deficiency
• Gates overrules Aguilar-Spinelli and creates the totality of circumstances test for PC except in MA

Question 7

Before a 4th amendment violation is even considered, there are several initial inquiries that must be looked at. List and explain 4

Answer 7

1. Standing—were their personal rights violated
2. Government action—law enforcement/police have to be the ones to do it
3. Are you one of the persons named in the warrant—the term is not all-inclusive
4. Did they search your person—head to toe, anything on your person, anything inside your person (DNA, saliva, etc.)