Probable Cause Flashcards
(22 cards)
The reasonable belief is grounded on facts. A reasonable ground to suspect that a person has committed or is committing a crime or that a place contains specific items connected with a crime.
Probable Cause
In dealing with probable cause, however, as the very name implies, we deal with probabilities. These are not technical; they are the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians, act.
Brinegar v U.S. (1949)
Probable cause is a concern for officers in making an arrest, it is a concern for the judge in issuing warrants, and it is a concern for the court when the probable cause determination is made at a preliminary hearing or by the Grand Jury in a capital or infamous crime.
Probable Cause Impact
The constitutional validity of every arrest, whether it is made with a warrant or without a warrant, depends upon the existence of probable cause at the moment the arrest is made.
Magistrate’s Duty: Arrest
Filing an affidavit containing facts to satisfy the probable cause requirement is essential to authorize the issuance of a search warrant.
Magistrate’s Duty: Searches
The Court said that officers intruding on the privacy of citizens are well-advised to seek a disinterested determination of probable cause from an impartial magistrate because in “doubtful or marginal cases, a search under a warrant may be sustainable where without one it would fail.”
U.S. v Ventresca (1965)
The Court held that mere conclusory statements which give a magistrate no basis to make a judgment regarding probable cause are insufficient to support the issuance of a search warrant.
State v Smith (1990)
The South Carolina Supreme Court held that the affidavit underlying the search warrant in the case was insufficient to support a finding of probable cause.
State v Weston (1997)
In seeking a warrant to search the defendant’s home for crack cocaine, the officer submitted an affidavit stating,
Within the past ten days, a confidential and reliable informant of the Richland County Sheriff’s Department observed crack stored in the above location. Within the past seventy-two hours this source has received verbal information the crack is presently being stored at this location. Due to the totality of the information, agents believe that crack is currently stored in the above-described residence. The informant is reliable in that it has furnished information on five occasions which has led to one arrest.
State v Clifton (1990)
The Constitution of the United States and the State of South Carolina require that search warrants be “supported by oath or affirmation.”
State v McKnight (1987)
The facts to which an officer can testify are invaluable as elements of probable cause. Examples include: Observations, smell, touch, hearing, knowledge of suspect, etc.
Personal Knowledge
There are individuals who are identifiable as the source of information. Their names and occupations may be identified with the information furnished. Witnesses, victims, fellow officers, official records, and custodians are typical sources of such information.
Secondhand Information: Identifiable Source
Another category of source is the good citizen informant. This type of informant is distinguished from a criminal informant who supplies information on a recurring basis for money or other personal gains.
Secondhand Information: Good Citizen Information
Information from anonymous sources can also be considered. However, additional facts and circumstances (corroboration) must be obtained in order to establish probable cause.
Secondhand Information: Anonymous Tip
The so-called confidential criminal informant is viewed differently. The confidential criminal informant is part of the criminal element and is normally selling the information to law enforcement, seeking favorable treatment on pending charges, or furnishing such information in connection with favorable treatment in the past. They are not considered to be inherently trustworthy.
Secondhand Information: Confidential Criminal Information
The South Carolina Supreme Court concluded that the magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed when the citizen who gave information to the police was a witness to the events described in the affidavit and the events were described in great specificity.
State v Bellamy (1999)
Driggers had argued that the search warrant was defective because the officer’s affidavit did not mention that the police had any previous contacts with Mr. Klepp-Egge, who gave information to the police and did not comment on his reliability. The South Carolina Court of Appeals held that there was probable cause to issue the warrant. There were sufficient other indicators of the reliability of his statements.
State v Driggers (1996)
This decision formed the basis for using informant information in an affidavit prior to the Gates case (1964-1983) and is commonly referred to as the “two-pronged” test: the source’s (1) basis of knowledge (2) reliability-credibility.
Aguilar v Texas (1964)
When using informant information in an affidavit, the Court developed a new test, “totality of circumstances,” affording a magistrate broad discretion in determining probable cause.
Illinois v Gates (1983)
The Court affirmed the Gates case and specifically rejected the separate requirement of the “two-pronged” test.
The current test for the sufficiency of information is known as the Totality of Information Test or Totality of the Circumstances – If the source provided specific and detailed information that can be verified by independent law enforcement investigation, the magistrate can accept the “totality of information” as his/her basis for determination of probable cause.
Massachusetts v Upton (1984)
Confirmation or support by additional evidence or authority.
Corroboration
If an officer stops a vehicle based on probable cause of a traffic violation and, after stopping the vehicle, lawfully discovers illegal drugs in the vehicle, the stop is proper under the Fourth Amendment.
Whren v United States (1996)
