Fourth Amendment: Stops, Searches, and Arrests Overview

Articulable Facts

Specific observations supporting reasonable suspicion.

Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Court of Nevada

a state law requiring a person to disclose their name to law enforcement during a Terry stop is consistent with the Fourth Amendment, as long as the stop is based on reasonable suspicion and the request for identification is reasonably related to the circumstances of the stop.

SCOTUS

Supreme Court of the United States.

Investigative Stop

Temporary detention for questioning by police.

Police Discretion

Officers' judgment in enforcing laws and procedures.

Suspicious Individuals

People whose behavior raises police concerns.

Illinois v Wardlow

Case establishing flight in high crime area indicates reasonable suspicion.

Unprovoked Flight

Running from police without prior interaction or provocation
(Illinois v Wardlow)

Racial Profiling

Law enforcement targeting individuals based on race.

Maryland v. Wilson

SCOTUS held that officers making a traffic stop may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop.

Arizona v Johnson

Frisking passengers in stopped vehicles is lawful as long as there is reasonable suspicion that the passenger is armed and dangerous

Michigan v Sitz

Sobriety checkpoints are reasonable without suspicion.

no need for individualized suspicion

Indianapolis v Edmond

Drug checkpoints primarily for crime control are unconstitutional.

Illinois v Lidster

Checkpoint for information led to lawful DUI arrest.

US v. Montoya de Hernandez

Extended border detentions allowed with reasonable suspicion.

Anonymous Tips

Anonymous tips alone are not typically enough to establish probable cause but can provide reasonable suspicion if corroborated by police observations or other evidence.

or an anonymous tip to establish probable cause, it must meet specific reliability standards, including corroboration and sufficient detail. (Florida v J.L. and Navarette v California)

Draper v US

Hearsay evidence can establish probable cause for arrest.

Arrest Warrant Requirement

Warrant needed for home arrests

Neutral Magistrate

Judge must assess probable cause for warrants.

a disinterested judge has to decide whether there is probable cause before officers arrest suspects

Affidavit

Sworn statement supporting probable cause for warrants.

Exigent Circumstances

Situations allowing warrantless arrests due to urgency.

Hot Pursuit

Chasing suspect allows warrantless entry into premises.

Imminent Destruction of Evidence

Urgent need to prevent evidence from being destroyed.

Arrest by Force

Use of force must be reasonable and necessary.

Public Perception of Force

Misunderstandings about frequency of deadly force usage.

Deadly Force

Force likely to cause death or serious injury.

Tennessee v Garner

Supreme Court case defining deadly force limits.

law enforcement officers may not use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others.

Graham v Connor

Case establishing 'objective reasonableness' standard.

The Court emphasized that the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard is not about the officer's intentions but about whether the force used was reasonable under the circumstances.

Kuha v City of Minnetonka

Case assessing police dog use in apprehension.

police use of a canine to apprehend a fleeing suspect does not constitute excessive force under the Fourth Amendment, provided the deployment is reasonable and the officer gives a warning prior to releasing the dog, if feasible.

Estate of Ronald Armstrong v Village of Pinehurst

Tasers and similar "pain compliance" tools are considered an intermediate level of force and should only be used when a suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of officers or others.

Custodial Arrest

when a person is taken into police custody and their freedom of movement is significantly restricted, usually because they are being formally charged with a crime.

Atwater v City of Lago Vista

According to the Court, as long as there is probable cause that an individual committed a crime (no matter how minor), the officer has the discretion to arrest.

Search Warrant

Legal document authorizing a search.

Particularity Requirement

Warrants must specify place and items to seize.

Knock and Announce Rule

Officers must announce presence before entering.

Digital Evidence

Challenges in privacy and warrant requirements.

Wilson v Arkansas

Case on no-knock entry and Fourth Amendment.

Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement includes a general "knock-and-announce" principle. This means that, before entering a home to execute a warrant, law enforcement officers must generally knock and announce their presence.

State v Richards

Case on drug house searches and knock-and-announce.

upheld a blanket exception to the knock-and-announce rule for drug-related searches, asserting that officers do not need to knock and announce their presence before executing a warrant in such cases due to the potential for evidence destruction.

Banks v US

officers may forcibly enter a home after a reasonable wait time following their announcement, based on the totality of the circumstances, including the risk of evidence destruction

Officers acted reasonably given the potential loss of evidence (cocaine) within seconds.

Reasonableness Standard

Assessment based on immediate circumstances.

Pain Compliance Tools

Intermediate force used only for immediate threats.

Excessive Force

Force exceeding what is necessary for compliance.

Estate of Ronald Armstrong v Village of Pinehurst

Immediate Threat

Condition justifying use of higher force levels.

Searches and Privacy

Balancing crime control with individual rights.

Justice Robert H. Jackson

Advocated for Fourth Amendment protections.

Legal Framework for Searches

Was the government action a search?
If it was a search, was it reasonable?
If it was unreasonable, should the evidence be excluded?

Evidence Exclusion

Unreasonable search leads to evidence dismissal.

Knock-and-announce requirement

Officers must announce presence before entering.

Reasonableness standard

Determines legality based on specific case factors.

Johnson v United States

Smelling opium provided probable cause but did not excuse the warrant requirement. Searches must be authorized by neutral magistrates to ensure impartiality. Evidence obtained without a valid warrant violated the Fourth Amendment.

Reinforced the principle that probable cause alone does not justify a warrantless search.

Young v City of Radcliff

The case established that while officers can seek consent without a warrant, consent must be freely and voluntarily given. Any use of intimidation, coercion, or implied force renders the consent invalid, making the search unconstitutional.

Warrantless searches

Allowed in limited exceptions under SCOTUS rulings where enforcing the warrant requirement is impractical.

Search incident to arrest

Searches allowed without warrant post-arrest.

Chimel v California

Established 'grabbable area' rule for searches.

they came into his house with an arrest warrant not a search warrant, that's why searching the entire home was unconstitutional

New York v. Belton

SCOTUS ruled that police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a lawful arrest.

Expanded Chimel's "grabbable area" to include the vehicle's interior.

Arizona v Gant

SCOTUS narrowed Belton, ruling that officers can only search a vehicle if:
- The arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of the vehicle. (Gant was secured and unable to access the vehicle, so there was no threat to officer safety or evidence destruction.)
- There is reason to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the crime of arrest. (The officers had no reason to believe the car contained evidence related to his arrest (for driving with a suspended license).)

US v. Robinson

A full search of the person is permissible following a lawful custodial arrest, even without specific suspicion of danger or evidence.

Knowles v Iowa

Citation does not justify full vehicle search.

Whren v United States

Subjective officer intentions irrelevant if justified.

Waiver Test

The waiver test indirectly influences how courts assess whether officers improperly coerced consent.

For instance, police cannot mislead someone into thinking they have no choice but to comply.

Scope of consent

Defined by reasonable officer interpretation.

Third party consent search

Consent given by one for another's property.
(actual authority consent and apparent authority consent)

Actual authority consent

Legally valid consent from authorized individual.

Apparent authority consent

Takes place when someone who officers reasonably believes (but in fact doesn't) have the authority to consent to a search of your home and or stuff

Illinois v Rodriguez

Search valid if based on reasonable mistaken belief.

police searched Rodriguez's apartment based on a third party's consent (his ex-girlfriend), who lacked authority to grant access.

"Apparent authority" permits searches when officers act based on reasonable assumptions, even if those assumptions turn out to be incorrect.

Carroll v United States

Law enforcement officers may conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle if they have probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime.

the Carroll doctrine paved the way for subsequent rulings expanding the automobile exception to include searches of containers within vehicles and other movable objects.

California v Acevedo

Established a rule allowing officers to search containers within vehicles as long as probable cause exists.

Wyoming v. Houghton

Passenger belongings can be searched if the vehicle itself has probable cause.

Emergency searches

Situations where obtaining a warrant is not feasible due to imminent danger.
such as Prevent destruction of evidence.
Protect officer/community safety.
Apprehend fleeing suspects

Schmerber v. California

The case established that warrantless blood draws are permissible under exigent circumstances, particularly in DUI cases, as long as the procedure is performed in a reasonable and medically appropriate manner.

Wardlow v. Hayden

Search during hot pursuit deemed lawful.

Adams v. Williams

Terry stop (brief detention) and frisk (pat-down for weapons) may be conducted based on information provided by a reliable informant, even if the officer does not personally observe suspicious behavior.

Frisks

Light pat-downs for weapons, ensuring officer safety.

Searches

Invasive examinations varying by context and location.

Balancing Element

Need for search must outweigh privacy invasion.

Suspicious Behavior

Actions that may indicate potential criminal activity.

Anonymous Tip

Information from an unidentified source.

Probable Cause

Reasonable grounds for making an arrest or search.

probable cause exists when an officer has sufficient facts and evidence to reasonably believe that a person has committed, is committing, or will commit a crime.

Legal Precedent

Previous court decisions influencing future cases.

High Crime Area

Area with significant criminal activity present.

End Racial Profiling Act of 2011

Legislation aimed at eliminating racial profiling practices.

Terry Frisk

Limited pat-down for weapons after lawful stop.

Information Seeking Checkpoints

Checkpoints established to gather information on crimes.

Non Deadly Force

Force not likely to cause death or serious injury.

Overbroad Requests

Warrants that sweep in unrelated data.

Search of an iPhone

FBI's overbroad warrant application rejected.

Magistrate Role

Judges overseeing warrant applications and privacy.

Consent searches

Legal searches based on voluntary consent.

Totality of Circumstances Test

Evaluates context for consent validity.

Schneckloth v Bustamonte

Voluntary consent doesn't require knowledge of rights.

Withdrawing consent

Must be explicit and unequivocal to be valid.

Stop and Frisk

Police practice of briefly detaining suspicious individuals.

Fourth Amendment

Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Reasonableness Clause

Ensures security against unreasonable searches.

Warrant Clause

Requires probable cause for issuing search warrants.

Objective Basis

Clear suspicious facts needed for detaining individuals.

the arrest was backed up by probable cause

Bright Line Rules

Guidelines set by SCOTUS for reasonable police actions.

Terry v. Ohio

brief investigatory stop (Terry stop) and a limited pat-down search (frisk) for weapons are permissible under the Fourth Amendment.

This is an exception to the warrant requirement but must be based on specific and articulable facts that create reasonable suspicion.

Direct Information

Facts observed firsthand by law enforcement officers.

Hearsay Information

Information from secondary sources like tips.