Police Procedure and Use of Force

landmark cases

cases that are responsible for creating/refining a judicial interpretation are called

supreme court

identified by the chief justice's last name

warren court

most liberal court ever

burger court

followed the liberal views of the warren court

much most conservative than the previous

rehnquist court

under the 4th Amendment, police must present probable cause to a judicial magistrate to obtain a warrant to search for instruments of a crime, fruits of a crime, illegal items, or general evidence of a crime

search warrants

enough evidence to make a reasonable person believe that a crime has been committed and that a search warrant would uncover proof of that crime.

probable cause

the officer must know what he is looking for and where he is going to look

particularity

cannot look in places where an item that is being searched for cannot possibly be found

reasonableness

evidence obtained through an illegal search/seizure cannot be used in court for any reason

exclusionary rule

evidence derived from an illegal search/seizure is also inadmissible in court

fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine

evidence is allowed, even with a faulty warrant, if police honestly believed they were following the law

good faith exception

when a person voluntarily allows law enforcement to conduct a search without a warrant and/or probable cause

consent

when waiting for a warrant would cause harm. risk lives, or destroy evidence, officers can act immediately

emergency

officers may seize evidence in plain view if they are lawfully present and the item's illegality is immediately obvious without moving anything

plain view

allows officers to search a person and the immediate area around them without a warrant after making a lawful arrest (probable cause is not necessary)

search incident to lawful arrest

officer can pat outer clothing for weapons if specific facts give reasonable suspicion of danger or crime; stop ≠ arrest.

stop and frisk

lawful stop and frisk lets an officer seize contraband if its illegal nature is immediately obvious by touch after patting for weapons

plain feel

done by govt to enforce rules or safety, not to gather criminal evidence; privacy limited for public protection

administrative searches

dog can alert and create probable cause; legality depends on location and consent

drug dogs

officers can search without warrant if there is probable cause, including locked containers, since it is less protected than a home

vehicle searches

even if police acted unlawfully, the evidence would have been found eventually through legal means

inevitable discovery

main requirement for any arrest

probable cause

police can arrest without a warrant if

the crime is committed in their presence, probable cause that person committed a felony

warrant must contain

fact of crime, offense, accused's role in crime, judicial approval

when probable cause exists, police may follow suspect to prevent escape/destruction of evidence

hot pursuits

police must identify their authority and purpose

announcement requirement

search warrant is also necessary to search someone else's property

third-party premises

when an officer uses force to prevent a suspect from leaving and they know they are being held

informal arrest

a person can be held by police for a limited time without formal charges (usually 48-72 hours)

detainment

when a person is booked and processed following an arrest

formal arrest

a brief detainment for questioning; probable cause not required but reasonable suspicion is

stop

officer must have reasonable suspicion that

a crime is about to be, is being, has just been committed

officer must do this before detaining the person

articulate specific reasons for the stop

officer observes unusual conduct, behavior leads to reasonable suspicion of a crime, officer must be able to articulate suspicions

three pronged test required for stops

before 1993: no weapon, no crime

after 1993: non-weapon contraband that can be felt is valid

terry v dickinson in regards to stop and frisk

fifth amendment

protection from self-incrimination

physical force cannot be used to obtain a confession

brown v mississippi

applied brown v mississippi to state courts

malloy v hogan

the right to an attorney; most important ruling EVER

escobedo v illinois

established that suspects must be informed of their rights before custodial interrogation

miranda v arizona

evidence obtained illegally can be used if it would have been inevitably discovered through lawful investigation

nix v williams

police can question a suspect without miranda warnings if immediate public safety is at risk

ny v quarles

being questioned voluntarily does not trigger miranda rights

stansbury v cali

suspects must clearly invoke their right to an attorney; ambiguous requests do not require police to stop questioning

davis v US

a miranda waiver is valid if voluntary, knowing, and intelligent, even if the suspect does not know their lawyer was contacted

moran v burbine

force used by law enforcement that is non-negotiable and coercive; includes verbal commands, physical force, and less-lethal tools

non-negotiable coercive force

not swung as a weapon; used to poke, block, target nerve points

baton use

less-lethal; effectiveness varies

pepper spray

less-than-lethal; can be fatal for people with heart conditions

taser

police can use deadly force only when their life or other's are in danger

fleeing felon law

overturned the old rule allowing deadly force on all fleeing felons

tn v garner