Chapters 12-15 Criminal Process

1. Chapters 12-15 Criminal Process

2. 4th Amendment Guarantees citizens the right to go about their business free of unreasonable interference by the police Protection against Unreasonable Search and Seizure by government officials home, business, papers, bank accounts, computer, & personal items Constitution does not give citizens absolute right to privacy

3. Define Search & Seizure • Searching persons for evidence • Searching places and things for evidence • Seizing evidence • Seizing a person (detaining)

4. Officer’s authority to detain citizens against their will is regulated by 3 principles • 4th Amendment • State Constitution • State arrest laws (statutory laws)

5. 3 classes of Seizures (detaining a person) • Voluntary encounters • Investigatory stops • Arrests What is a Seizure? Occurs when a suspect submits to a officer’s show of legal authority or the officer gains actual physical control of the suspect

6. officers need reasonable suspicion to stop and question you • Based on less info than probable cause

7. Police officers are not required by law to inform you of your rights before asking you to consent to a search. In addition, police are prepared to use their authority to get people to consent to searches, and most people are predisposed to comply with any request an officer makes. For example, the average motorist stopped by an officer who asks them, "Would you mind if I search your vehicle, please?" will probably consent to the officer’s search without realizing that they have every right to deny the officer’s request. • If for any reason you don’t want the officer digging through your belongings, you should refuse to consent by saying something like, "Yes, I do mind. I have private, personal items in my [car, backpack, etc.] and do not want you looking through them." If the officer still proceeds to search you and find illegal contraband, your attorney can argue that the contraband was discovered through an illegal search and hence should be thrown out of court.

8. Crossing the 4th Amendment Boundary

9. 4th Amendment violated when seizure is unreasonable • Officer lacked adequate grounds for the seizure • Officer failed to secure a warrant in a situation in which one is required • Officer used excessive force to effect the seizure Force may be used or varies w/ the seriousness of the offense, or if safety of officer or others appear at risk

10. Voluntary Encounters • Not regulated by 4th Amendment • Police have a “free zone” for investigative work • Liberty to approach citizens and ask questions, or request other forms of assistance • Suspect’s compliance w/ request in voluntary and consensual • SEIZURE occurs when suspect’s freedom of movement is restrict, suspect brought under control of officer, or physical restraint

11. Example • Voluntary Encounter = police ask suspect to cooperate w/ investigation; to take a breathalyzer test – this occurs voluntarily • 4th Amendment kicks in when suspect’s movement is restricted and suspect is brought under officer’s control • Officer now has probable cause to believe suspect has committed a crime • Suspect is under arrest, now we are exceeding the boundaries of investigatory stop

12. Officers are free to ask for any form of voluntary assistance, identification, answer questions, permission to search belongings, consent to Breathalyzer, as long as they do not restrict the suspect’s freedom of movement or indicate that it is mandatory • Suspect has right to refuse • Evidence is always admissible when suspect furnishes it voluntarily

13. “Sticky Fingered Sam” • While patrolling neighborhood late one night, officer sees Sticky Sam lugging a stereo down the street. Officer gets out of his car, w/ one hand on his revolver, stands in front of Sam and says “Hey! Put that stereo down and show me some ID” Sam stops and complies. Sam has been SEIZED • Sam was seized by submission to a legal authority. Sam probably did not wish to, but he did. Physical seizure was not a factor, but Sam was still SEIZED

14. Time of seizure important • Evidence procured from suspect w/out a seizure is always admissible, whereas evidence procured after a seizure may or may not be admissible in court • Admissibility will turn on whether the officer had grounds for the seizure • Officers need to be aware of when they have constitutional grounds to proceed

15. A narcotics detective observes a nervous young man pull out a roll of $100 bills at a airport ticket counter and pay cash for a one-way ticket. Acting on a hunch that he is a drug courier, she approaches him, shows her badge and says “Would you mind answering some questions about the purpose of your travel and contents of your bag?” The young man complies. • Once again he complied to legal authority voluntarily

16. Different approach • After observing the purchase, detective approaches the young man, shows her badge and says in a commanding voice “You are under suspicion of transporting drugs. Pick up your bags and follow me. I am taking you to the security office for questioning” The young man complies. • This encounter is considered a SEIZURE • Young man was not “free to leave”

17. “Free to Leave” • Perception of not being able to leave must arise from the behavior of the police or NOT

18. California v. Hodari D • Juvenile was standing on street corner ran when he saw approaching police car • Officers got out and pursued him on foot, yelling at him to stop • Juvenile discarded a rock of crack cocaine seconds before the officers tackled him • Supreme Court ruled, even though officers lacked grounds for seizing him before the chase, the evidence was still admissible

19. 4 relevant degrees of suspicion • Hunch lowest degree, encounter w/ suspect must be voluntary, suspect may not be seized • Investigatory detention is limited seizure made for purpose of investigating circumstances that aroused officer’s suspicion • Probable Cause is police know enough to facts to warrant a reasonable person in believing, not just suspecting, that individual is guilty of a crime, probable cause to make a arrest • Beyond reasonable doubt = conviction and punishment

20. In order to determine constitutional grounds for action/Probable Cause • Identify all the facts and circumstance known at the time action was taken • Weigh the facts in combination and • Evaluate their implications from the perspective of trained officer

21. Different degrees of suspicion carry very different legal consequences, there is no hard edged boundaries b/w the two • Trained officers must understand varying degrees of reasonable suspicion • Things they observe • Officer’s assumptions and interpretations • 2 men, street corner 1:00 a.m. • Neighborhood has frequent drug users • Drug transactions can take place 1:00 am • Money was seen being exchanged

22. Investigatory Stops

23. Officer activates lights and siren to stop a car • Motorist has been seized thru submission to the officer’s show of legal authority • Investigatory stops or arrests are limited seizures made for the purpose of conducting brief investigation • Permissible under lower degree of suspicion= Reasonable Suspicion

24. Investigatory Stops *Terry v. Ohio 1968 • Officer observes behavior that arouses reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is occurring, but NOT probable cause for arrest • Downtown Cleveland, 3 men gazing thru store window, they kept walking away and coming back to the window-5-6 times • Suspecting them of ??????

25. Officer approached them, ID himself and asked them their names, they mumbled something, officer grabbed one of them (Terry) and held him while patting down his exterior clothing, feeling a pistol, officer ordered Terry to remove coat and retrieve the pistol • Terry was charged w/ carrying concealed weapon • Terry’s attorney wanted to suppress the evidence on grounds the 4th Amendment does not allow officers to conduct a frisk w/out probably cause for an arrest

26. Supreme Court Ruling • Officers may briefly detain individuals for questioning when their conduct arouses a reasonable suspicion • Reasonable suspicion standard is less demanding than probable cause for an arrest • When detention is justified, (Terry was held) police may conduct a protective weapons search • Now known as a Terry Stop “pat and frisk”

27. Purpose of Terry Stop • Enables officer to investigate the circumstances of suspicion that prompted the stop in order to confirm or dispel their suspicion w/in a relatively short period of time • Terry’s case, reasonable suspicion led to probably cause, led to his arrest and conviction

28. Reasonable Suspicion • Person is spotted in high crime area or in close proximity • Person has a criminal record or in company of others w/ past criminal record • Person attempted to avoid contact w/ officer • Person gives suspicious, inconsistent, or false answers to routine questions • Person appears abnormally nervous or fidgety

29. Terry Stops need not to be based solely on the officer’s own personal observations • Can come from TIPS, if reliable and tipster’s credibility • You witnessed a customer drinking a can of beer while waiting for his order at a drive through window. You called the cops, and gave the information you observe red. They stopped him a few blocks away.

30. Illinois v. Gates Facts of the Case:  • The Bloomingdale, Illinois Police Department received an anonymous tip that Lance and Susan Gates were selling drugs out of their home. After observing the Gates's drug smuggling operation in action, police obtained a warrant and upon searching the suspects' car and home uncovered large quantities of marijuana, other contraband, and weapons. Question:  • Did the search of the Gates's home violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments? Conclusion:  • The Court found no constitutional violation • Justice Rehnquist argued that an informant's veracity, reliability, and basis of knowledge are important in determining probable cause, but that those issues are intertwined and should not be rigidly applied.

31. Purpose of Terry Stop • Is to enable the officer to investigate the underlying suspicion as quickly as possible • 4th Amendment does not allow police to detail citizens for lengthy periods on a mere suspicion of criminal activity

32. Miranda Rights are not required during Terry Stops, unless arrest-like force is necessary to execute the stop • Request for identification is most common, suspects may be arrested for refusing to disclose their name, b/c a person’s name is seldom incrimination

33. Terry Stop’s Purpose • Search for weapons • During pat down, officer feels an object that he recognizes as contraband and seizes it, even though not a weapon • “Plain Feel” doctrine • May or may not is admissible

34. Traffic and Vehicle Stops • Stopping a motorist is always a seizure, whether it’s making an arrest, issue traffic citation, investigate non-traffic offense, or as simple as checking registration • Reasonable suspicion to stop • Probable cause to make an arrest

35. Safety Precautions during Traffic Stops Officers may take the following precautions • Order you out of the car and passengers • Ask if you have weapons in the vehicle • Visually look inside the vehicle and flashlight around the interior • Run a criminal records check Reasonable suspicion search can become more intrusive, searching compartments, frisking the occupants

36. 4th Amendment is concerned w/ the stop’s duration not w/ the scope of the questioning that occurs during the stop

37. Traffic stop may lead to arrest, b/c of Probable Cause The arrest is lawful, so is the search Some states do not allow arrests for fine-only traffic violations

38. While making an arrest, minimum force is used • 1985 Supreme Court ruled “ deadly force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent escape, and the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others”

39. What is an Arrest? • Formal Arrest • Intentional, the intent is announced to the suspect • De Facto Arrest • Unintentional , beyond reasonable suspicion now probable cause becomes necessary

40. Probable Cause for Arrest • Officer applies for arrest warrant by preparing a sworn affidavit detailing the results of the investigation • Magistrate reviews the officer’s affidavit and determines whether the facts est. probable cause for an arrest • Of course, there may be times when warrant is not available

41. Probable Cause exist to… • Obtain search warrant • Conduct some searches w/out a warrant • Obtain an arrest warrant • Make an arrest w/out an warrant • Probable Cause depends entirely on the facts of EACH case • Public areas probable cause is enough • Private areas need a warrant unless exigent circumstances

42. Search warrant is a court order • Officer must file an affidavit, facts that provides probably cause/ search is justified • Warrant must describe the person, place, and the particular things to be seized • Given certain number of days • Can seize evidence related to the case if in plain view when properly conducting the search (not on warrant) • Proceed w/ “knock and announce” test

43. Court does allow “no-knock” entries under certain circumstances = Exigent Circumstances • Consent given • Hot pursuit of suspect • Danger to officer’s safety • Danger to third party • Risk of suspect’s escape • Risk of destruction of evidence

44. Warrants only when the arrest is made inside a private dwelling • Do not have to procure a warrant to make arrest in public place or inside a commercial establishment (hotels for example) • People to voluntarily leave confines of their home, stand on their porch, in their yard-given up their right to “private” dwelling

45. Searches • Plain View

46. California v. Ciraolo Facts of the Case:  • The Santa Clara Police received an anonymous tip that Ciraolo was growing marijuana in his back yard. Unable to observe the yard from the ground due to a high fence which encircled it, the police secured a private plane and flew over Ciraolo's house at an altitude of 1,000 feet. The fly-over confirmed the presence of marijuana. The police then obtained a search warrant, seized 73 plants on the next day, and arrested Ciraolo who then pleaded guilty to the cultivation of marijuana. The California Court of Appeals, however, found that the aerial observation was illegal and reversed Ciraolo's conviction. Question:  • Did the warrantless, aerial observation of Ciraolo's back yard from an altitude of 1,000 feet constitute an illegal search and violate the Fourth Amendment? Conclusion:  • The divided Court found that the observation did not violate the Constitution. Chief Justice Burger reasoned that the Fourth Amendment protections regarding the home had never been absolute: for example, police officers are not obligated to shield their eyes when passing homes on public streets or sidewalks. • Since the observations of the Santa Clara officers was "nonintrusive" and "took place within public navigable airspace," their actions were consistent with the Fourth Amendment. "Any member of the public flying in this airspace who glanced down could have seen everything that these officers observed," concluded Burger.

47. Bond v. United States Facts of the Case:  • While checking the immigration status of passengers on a bus in Texas, Border Patrol Agent Cesar Cantu squeezed the soft luggage which passengers had placed in the overhead storage space. When Agent Cantu squeezed a canvas bag above Steven Dewayne Bond, Agent Cantu noticed that it contained a "brick-like" object. After Bond admitted owning the bag and consented to its search, Agent Cantu discovered a "brick" of methamphetamine. Bond was indicted on federal drug charges. Bond moved to suppress the drugs, arguing that the agent conducted an illegal search of his bag, when squeezing it, in alleged violation of the Federal Constitution's Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. The District Court denied the motion and subsequently found Bond guilty. On appeal, Bond conceded that other passengers had access to his bag, but contended that Agent Cantu manipulated the bag (by squeezing)in a way that other passengers would not, thus constituting an unreasonable search. In affirming the denial of the motion, the Court of Appeals held that Agent Cantu's manipulation of the bag was not a search under the Fourth Amendment. Question:  • Does a law enforcement officer's physical manipulation of a bus passenger's carry-on luggage violate the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches? Conclusion:  • Yes. In a 7-2 opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that "Agent Cantu's physical manipulation of petitioner's carry-on bag violated the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable searches." The Court concluded that Bond "possessed a privacy interest in his bag," and that such an expectation of privacy is reasonable. • "Physically invasive inspection is simply more intrusive than purely visual inspection," Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the Court, a bus passenger "does not expect that other passengers or bus employees will, as a matter of course, feel the bag in an exploratory manner."

48. Scope of a Search Searching for stolen pink baby elephant, can not look under the bed, open envelopes, in size 10 shoe, etc… • Probable Cause = Search Warrant • Search authority under a warrant only extends to the locations describe in it • Issued for “Sam’s” kitchen, then police may NOT search bedroom, garage, tool shed, etc… • Intensity of Search = police may only look in places that are potential areas of the objects for which they have a search authority

49. You can give consent to a search • A Third party consent extends to the areas shared in common • Male can not give consent to female roommate’s purse even if in an area of the house shared by both • Male gave consent to search for drugs, whole entire apartment would be under authority • Police are not required to advise people of their right to refuse when asking for permission to search

50. Vehicle search based on probable cause • If they had to leave to secure a warrant, the vehicle would be gone • Can search if they believe vehicle contains evidence that they may lawfully seize • If looking for a stolen television, can not look in your purse