Criminal Due Process - Quiz 1

all content + cases + rules

Facts of Duncan v. Louisiana (1968)

Defendant charged with simple assault

Sought trial by Jury (in Louisiana only jury trial for capital offenses)

Sentenced to 60 days in prison and $150 fine

Issue for Duncan v. Louisiana

Does the 6th amendment apply to states through the 14th amendment?

Holding for Duncan vs. Louisiana

Yes, 6th amendment right to a jury trial is fundamental and is protected by the 14th amendment.

Majority Opinion/Reasoning for Duncan vs. Louisiana

Jury trial is a fundamental right against government oppression and biased judges

Because he faced up to 2 years, considered serious

Denying jury trial in serious criminal cases denies due process

What do the supreme judicial court and appeals court hear?

only hear cases where an error of court is alleged

What are superior and district courts hear?

trial courts

supreme court → 2.5 years or more

district courts → 2.5 years or less

What do you need for the 4th amendment to apply?

A reasonable expectation of privacy

Facts of Rakas v. Illinois (1978)

Police stopped a car suspected of robbery

Rakas and others were in car but did not own it (Rakas in back passenger seat)

Police found a rifle and rifle shells in the car

Charged with robbery and wanted to suppress the evidence because it violated their 4th amendment

Issue for Rakas v. Illinois

Do passengers in a car have standing to challenge a vehicle search under the 4th amendment when they do not own the car or items?

Holding for Rakas v. Illinois

No, because they did not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in areas searched

Reasoning for Rakas v. Illinois

Rejected traditional “standing” analysis and reframed the issue as a substantive 4th amendment question

The passengers had no property in the car, had no control over the glove compartment or under-seat area, did not claim ownership of the gun or ammunition

Being present int he car is not enough to establish a reasonable expectation of privacy

4th protects people not places, but only where privacy expectations are legitimate

Facts for Wolf v. Colorado

Convicted in Colorado for conspiring to perform criminal abortions

Police searched Wolf’s medical office without a warrant

Evidence obtained was introduced at trial

Wolf argued search violated 4th amendment rights and evidene should be excluded

Issue for Wolf v. Colorado

Does the 4ths protection against unreasonable searches and seizures apply to the states through the 14th amendment? If so, must states exclude illegal evidence?

Holding for Wolf v. Colorado

Yes, 4th applies to states, No, states don’t have to adopt exclusionary rule

Reasoning for Wolf v. Colorado

The court recognized privacy from unreasonable searches as a basic right implicit in ordered liberty

Incorperation doesn’t require states to use identical enforcement mechanisms as the federal government

Exclusionary ruled as one possible remedy, not essential component of 4th amendment

States could deter police misconduct through: civil remedies, internal police discipline, other state-level protections

Federalism concerns supported allowing states flexibility in enforcement

What gets the most 4th amendment protection

Home

What was the commonwealth vs. DeJesus case?

If one person establishes privacy in the room, everyone gets it

Who has to complete the action for hte 4th to be violated?

Police/Law Enforcement

Who is protected by the 4th?

“The People” → not all inclusive

“secure in their houses”

Includes all structures used as a residence, where temp or long term

includes buildings attached to residences such as garage

Also includes “curlidge” → area that which extends the intimate activity associated with the sanctity of a home and privacies of life

Does not include open fields

Offices, commercial structures and stores have some protection

Facts of Katz v. US (1976)

FBI agents suspected Katz of illegal gambling activities

Agents placed electronic listening device on the outside of a public phone booth

Agents recorded Katz’s convo without a warrant

Katz was convicted based on the recordings

Issue of Katz v. US

Does the recording a person’s conversation in a public phone booth without a warrant violate the 4th amendment?

Holding for Katz v. US

Yes because the gov electronic surveillance constituted a search under the 4th

Majority Rule/Reasoning of Katz v. US

4th protects people not places

A search occurs when the gov violates a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy, even without physical trespass

Katz entered phone booth and closed the door, signaling expectation of privacy

Gov electronically listened to Katz’s private convo

Physical penetration of space is not required for a 4th search

What a person seeks to preserve as private, even in a public area may be constitutionally protected

Facts for Smith v. MD (1979)

Police suspected Smith of robbery and harassment

Without a warrant, police asked the phone company to install a pen register

The pen register recorded the numbers dialed from Smith’s home phone

The dialed numbers matched the victims phone number

Smith was arrested and moved to suppress the evidence, claiming a 4th violation

Issue for Smith v. MD

Does the use of a pen register to record dialed phone numbers constitute a “search” under the 4th?

Holding for Smith v. MD

No, a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information voluntarily conveyed to third parties (third party doctrine)

Reasoning/Majority opinion for Smith v. MD

Dialed phone numbers are knowlingly conveyed to the phone company to complete calls

They routinely record info for business purposes

Smith assumed the risk that the phone company would disclose the number to police

Pen registers do not record content of convos, only numbers dialed

Impact of state case law

highest court of the state, has authority over all state court rulings so long as those rulings do not violate US consitutions/Bill of rights

MA court structure

District

Superior

Appeals

supreme Judicial Court

what is criminal law

defines conduct that society seeks to deter and punish

elements of a crime

criminal procedure

rules and regulations that govern whether a violation of a crim law has occured, means by which society implements its substantive goals

what was BOR designed to do

limit power of federal gov, not intended to limit states

what does 14th amendment do

imposes limit on state power

Whats an absolute prerequisite to establishing a 4th violation

personal expectation of privacy

Burdeu v. McDowell (1921)

held the 4th amendment, limits only gov. action, not private searches/seizures

secure in their persons

defendens body, interior of body, exterior of body

papers and effects

papers - personal items like diaries, business records, letters

effects - this is a carry all compenent, includes: cars, luggage, clothing and weapons

whats a remedy for the 4th violation

exclusionary rule

what didn’t apply during wolf v. colarado

4th amendment to states but wins in the fact states have to adopt 4th

what determined whether a search takes place prior to katz

trespass docterine

whats the reop test

1) did person have actual/subjective reasonable expectation of privacy

2) is it one society is willing to accept?

do u need both parts for the reop test to count

yes

Does katz overule trespass docterine for the time being

yes

US v. white facts

jackson was a confidential infornment

had 8 convos with white over 4 different times at Ci’s house, white’s house, public restroom and CI’s car

Gov agents hid nearby and used a reciever/radio equiptment to overhear

At trial, gov couldn’t produce Ci to testify and wanted to have the agents testify to what they overheard

US v. White issue

Does the 4th a bar testimony of gov agents who only overheard the convos between jackson and CI?

Reasoning for US v. White (1971)

No, white has no justifiable reop of privacy in his convo w jackson. Nor does he have a justifiable expectation that Jackson will not reveal convo to police. Society not willing to accept this REOP

What is the white case known as

fake friends case