Substance of 4th Amendment Flashcards Preview

Criminal Procedure > Substance of 4th Amendment > Flashcards

Flashcards in Substance of 4th Amendment Deck (30)
Loading flashcards...

Probable Cause

Exists where the facts and circumstances within officer's knowledge and of which they have reasonably trustworthy info are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been committed or is being committed by the person to be arrested.


Spinelli & Aguilar

This test was replaced by the totality of circumstances test from Gates. In order for search warrant based on informant's tip to be valid, informant must declare that 1) He saw or perceived facts asserted (knowledge) 2) There is a good reason for believing it (veracity)


Illinois v. Gates

D's were indicted for violation of state drug laws after police officers, executing a search warrant, discovered marijuana and other contraband in their automobile and home. So long as a substantial basis exists for concluding that a search would uncover evidence of wrongdoing, a warrant is valid under the 4th amendment. Totality of the circumstances test to determine whether probable cause has been met...balance competing interests. Was info credible? Did informant obtain this info in a reliable manner? Need to look at source of info, batting average of informant, have they been useful before, how useful, direct evidence or hearsay


Peyton v. NY

D challenged constitutionality of NY's statute that authorizes police officers to enter private residence without a warrant and with force, if necessary, to make a routine felony arrest. An arrest warrant is required to arrest a person in his home unless there are exigent circumstances that justify not securing an arrest warrant...may arrest outside of home without warrant. Exigent circumstances justify warrantless intrusion.


Search Warrants

Warrants must meet constitutional specifications (must meet test of probable cause). Must be based on probable cause and supported by oath or affirmation


Lo-Ji Sales v. NY

D was accused of violating state obscenity laws and argued that a warrant must describe with specificity each item to be seized during execution of warrant. A warrant must particularly describe things to be seized, and items not specifically listed on search warrant may not be seized. Magistrate who issues warrant must be a detached and neutral officer of the court and should not accompany officers on raid.


Knock and Announce Rule

Officers must announce presence upon execution of search warrant to permit resident(s) of home to get themselves together...15-20 seconds is sufficient before entering without answer. To dispense with rule, police must show reasonable suspicion that it would be dangerous or futile or would result in destruction of evidence


Kentucky v. King

Warrantless entry by police is considered reasonable when based on exigent circumstances, when police did not create exigent circumstances, by either engaging in or threatening to engage in conduct that violates 4th amendment



Searches Incident to a Lawful Arrest. Twin Motives: officer safety & fear of destruction of evidence. Search is automatic- entitled to search D's person and area within immediate control by way of entitlement stemming from right to search D.


Chimel v. CA

D was charged with 2 counts of burglary. He argued that items taken from his home and admitted into evidence had been unconstitutionally seized. Pursuant to a lawful arrest, police may conduct a search of any area within the immediate reach of the accused felon...felon's lunging/grabbing area or wingspan that may conceal evidence or a weapon


Car Searches

Lesser expectation of privacy based on characterization- inherently movable at flick of a switch. Do not need search warrant when probable cause attaches to a vehicle.


NY v. Belton

A lawful custodial arrest creates a situation that justifies a contemporaneous search without a warrant of person arrested and of immediately surrounding area--not overruled, but limited by Gant


Arizona v. Gant

Police officers searched passenger compartment of arrestee's vehicle after arrestee had been handcuffed in back of locked squad car for traffic violations, and arrestee objected to intro of drug-related evidence found during search based on 4th amendment. Police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if arrestee is unsecured at particular time and within reaching distance of passenger compartment OR if it is reasonable to believe vehicle contains evidence of crime of arrest inside.


Wren v. US

Vehicle stopped in suspicious manner in high crime area. Officer pulled up next to vehicle and vehicle turned without signaling and sped off. D charged with violating various federal drug laws. Pre-textual stops are ok so long as there is probable cause to support traffic violation in first place.


Chambers v. Maroney

D charged with armed robbery. Articles taken from vehicle during search at a police station admitted in evidence. If government agents have probable cause to believe an automobile contains articles they may be entitled to seize, may search vehicle pursuant to a lawful arrest, without a warrant, or impound vehicle into police custody to be searched at a later time. Search must be done immediately without a warrant, if done at a later time, must get a warrant.


CA v. Carey

D was charged with possession of marijuana after police discovered drugs in motor home. If a vehicle is being used on highways or it is readily capable of such use and is found stationary in a place not regularly used for residential purposes, temporary or otherwise, two justifications for vehicle exceptions come info play: 1) The inherent mobility 2) The fact that people in vehicles do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of a vehicle (because it is traveling on roads, in public view, and is heavily regulated by the state)


US v. Chadwick

D was indicted for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and conspiracy after police seized and later, without a warrant, searched a footlocker containing evidence. A search warrant is required to search personal property of an arrestee at the point where the property to be searched comes under exclusive dominion of police authority.


CA v. Acevedo

D was charged with possession of marijuana. Charges were based on search of a paper bag, which D placed in the trunk of his car. If police have probable cause to search entire car, they can search the entire car and any containers within it which might contain the object of their affections or search. Once object of affection or search is found, search should technically stop unless there is something in plain view that is potentially incriminating.


Plain View Doctrine

Warrantless seizure of evidence of a crime found in plain view should not be prohibited by 4th amendment even if discovery of evidence was not inadvertent. Plain view doctrine may not be used to justify warrantless searches or seizures of a dwelling which require probable cause. 1) Police need to be lawfully present (warrant or exigent circumstances) 2) Immediately incriminating to sense of police that it is contraband gives rise to probable cause. When an item is manipulated or moved it is no longer considered to be in plain view.



Police officers do not need probable cause to conduct a search if consent is granted. Need not obtain a warrant and knowledge of right to refuse consent to search is not required.


Voluntariness of Consent

Look at why was consent granted. Take into consideration totality of circumstances: subtly coercive police questions/behavior (# of officers, demeanor of officers, size & tone of voice); possible vulnerability of person who consents (subjective) & scope of consent. Consent may be withdrawn once granted, but must be expressly asserted that says stop search.


Georgia v. Randolph

D was convicted of a drug offense based on evidence that resulted from a search of his home to which only his wife consented, over his objection. In the case of a physically present objecting party, physically present refusal is dispositive and overrules yes given by other trumps yes. Requires physical presence of objector.


Illinois v. Rodriguez

D was charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver after his girlfriend let police into his apartment and evidence was discovered. If officers have reason to believe individual giving consent to search has authority over premises to be searched, then entry is validated even if later determined that person did not have authority.


Terry v. Ohio

If police have reasonable suspicion that suspect has committed a crime or is about to commit a crime, they may stop person, detain him briefly for questioning, and frisk suspect if reasonably believe suspect is carrying a dangerous weapon. To determine reasonableness, balance government's interest of keeping public safe against the public's interest of privacy, dignity and security of individual.


Terry Stop & Frisk

Reasonable suspicion comes from articulable facts--armed and presently dangerous. Topical search (only top of clothes)--conducted only for weapons, no manipulation of item. Should last only long enough to permit the officer to ask a number of questions briefly that will either confirm his reasonable suspicion or dismiss it


Dunway v. NY

Convicted of murder and attempted robbery based on statements made during police questioning. D was not placed under arrest but would be restrained if attempted to leave, taken to police station and given Miranda facto arrest.


US v. Mendenhall

Arrested for possession of heroin. Evidence of heroin found on her person during a search conducted by DEA agents was admitted into evidence against her. A person is seized, when in light of circumstances, a reasonable person would have believed she was no longer free to leave


Conduct Amounting to a Seizure

Threatening presence of officers, display of weapon by officer, physical touching of person, use of language or tone of voice indicating compliance with officer's request


Alabama v. White

Arrested for possession of cocaine and marijuana in violation of state law. Court held officers did not have reasonable suspicion necessary under Terry to justify stop of D's car and drugs seized were subject of unconstitutional detention. An anonymous tip received by police and not completely corroborated can be used as the basis for a Terry stop as long as a significant portion of tip can be verified.


Maryland v. Buie

B was arrested for armed robbery and convicted, based in part on evidence consisting of a running suit matching a witness's description that was found during a sweep of his home. Police can make a protective sweep of a dwelling during course of an arrest if have reasonable suspicion there is some danger. Must take place as soon as practicable within completion of arrest process and must not be elongated; can only look in areas that would house/contain a person.