Polisci Exam 3

Trespass Doctrine does what?

Protects individuals against physical intrusions upon their persons, real property, or possessions.

Olmstead v US (1928)

Instead of trespassing physically, the US used warentless wiretapping. The court ruled this was okay because the 4th amendment only protects from physical invasions

Katz v US (1967)

Police recorded a phone booth conversation Katz had with a listening device attached to the outside of the booth. US argued this to be okay because the 4th amendment protects “people, not places.” Resulted in the Katz Test.

What is the Katz test?

Requires an individual to have a subjective expectation of privacy and an objective expectation of privacy. Therefore, a physical trespass is not necessary to activate the 4th amendment protections.

What are the exceptions to the Katz test?

1. The 3rd party exception- if information was turned over to a 3rd party (like telephone calls, sharing info with a friend) then the individual didn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy

2. General Public Use Doctrine- info obtained from technology in “general public use” is not protected

Kyllo v. US (2001)

Used thermal imaging to see into the home, court ruled it violated the 4th amendment for trespassing into the privacy of the home. Said “in the home, the entire area is held safe from prying govt eyes.”

Florida v Jardines

Drug dog alerted police to drugs on someone’s porch, they got a warrant and came back. Court ruled this unreasonable and warentless because of the dog sniffing.

Morrison v Olson ruling

An overnight guest staying in another person’s residence has a legitimate expectation of privacy

Minnesota v. Carter

People visiting for a residence for a few hours does not give them a right to privacy

For a defendant to claim a violation of the 4th amendment, the defendant must show what two things?

1. Government conduct

2. A reasonable expectation of privacy

What is Government conduct?

the government or police were involved in the search or seizure

Reasonable expectation of privacy

the defendant had at least an ownership or possessory interest in the places searched or the items seized

A valid warrant requirement

• Must be probable cause for issuing

• Supported by oath or affirmation

• Particularly describe the place to be searched and persons/things being seized

• Be issued by a neutral magistrate

Probable Cause (higher standard)

Exists when a reasonable person has sufficient facts to deduce it was more likely than not that a crime occurred and that the defendant did it

Reasonable Suspicion (lower standard)

Police must have a specific articulable facts that suggest criminal activity is afoot

What is the exclusionary rule?

Any evidence obtained in violation of the 4th amendment is inadmissible

Fruit of poisonous tree doctrine

Not only must illegally obtained evidence be discarded, all evidence obtained or derived from the exploitation must also be discarded

Good faith exception

Evidence obtained through the execution of a defective warrant will not be excluded if the police had good faith the warrant was valid

Searches and Seizures Exclusionary rule applies to what amendments

4th, 5th, 6th

Exceptions to the exclusionary rule:

1. Confessions obtained through Miranda violated can be used for impeachment during cx

2. Independent source (the prosecution has an independent source other than the illegal search)

3. Inevitable discovery (evidence would have been found reguardless)

4. Intervening Act of Free Will (a defendant returns to police after release from an unlawful stop and confesses)

Exceptions to warrant requirements include

• Search incident to lawful arrest

• Hot pursuit

• Evanescent evidence (DNA, fingerprints, BAC)

• Consent

• Search incident to incarceration and booking

• Stop and frisk/terry stop

• Plain view

• Exigent circumstances (evidence distribution, fleeing, etc.)

• Automobile exception

• Inventory or impound search

• Police checkpoint

Consent (warrant)

• Warrentless search is valid with voluntary and intelligent consent

• Police dont have to inform you that you can refuse consent

• Must be within the scope of the consent given

• Person must have actual and apparent authority to consent

Search incident to a lawful arrest

• Police can search a person within areas of his/her immediate control

• Police can conduct a protective sweep of the area

• Police can search the person’s car if the defendant in unsecured or if the officer has reasonable believe that evidence of a crime is in the car

Hot Pursuit

Police in pursuit of a fleeing felon may make a warrentless search and may even pursue them into a home

Evanescent evident

Police can seize evidence without a warrant if the evidence is likely to disappear before a warrant can be obtained

Search incident to incarceration and booking

Police can conduct an inventory search upon booking

Stop and frisk (terry stop)

• Police can stop a person without probable cause for an arrest if the police have a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot

• If the officer believes the person is armed or if the officer believes they are

• Officer can check the glove box for weapons if the person hasn’t been placed under arrest

Plain view

Police can make a warrentless seizure when they are the premises legitimately, discover evidence or instruments of a crime, see evidence in plain view, or have probable cause

Exigent Circumstances

Police may enter a premises without a warrant to address emergencies that could affect health or safety

Automobile Exception

• have probable cause to believe a vehicle is contraband or contains evidence or instruments to a crime, they can search the whole vehicle

• Does not include carry on luggage or mass transit situations

• Can use a drug dog around the vehicle but must have reasonable suspicion

Inventory or impound search

Inventory of an arrestee’s vehicle once impounded

Police Checkpoint

• Police can set up roadblocks to stop cars without individualized suspicion

• A valid checkpoint must have: stop cars on some neutral, articulable standard be designed to serve purposes closely related to a specific issue

Border searches

• Reasonable suspicion standard applies

• Permanent checkpoints by border control is constitutional

Takings Clause does what

Prevents the government from taking property without just compensation (paying the entire value of the property)

Double Jeopardy Clause

Being tried twice for the same offense in the same jurisdiction

Self incrimination clause/pleading the 5th

The right to be free from self incrimination

Duel- Sovereignty Doctrine

A person violating both federal and state laws can be tried in both courts, but it prohibits trials in multiple cities and counties

When does double jeopardy apply?

Trial by jury and trial by judge

Miranda v Arizona

Suspects who are under custodial interrogation must be informed of and waive their constitutional rights

Custody definition

If a person does not reasonably feel free to leave (roadside stops do not count as custody)

Interrogation

Words or conduct likely to elicit an incriminating response

Once the right to remain silent is asserted, police must cease interrogation but can begin if:

Enough time has passed or if the defendant initiates a voluntary discussion with police

Police must honor the right to counsel and end all questioning until

The counsel is present or if the defendant initiates a voluntary discussion with police

For a self-incriminating statement to be admissible under the due process clause, what must happen?

It must be voluntary

What is the harmless error rule?

Coerced confessions are admissible into evidence if it did not contribute to the outcome of the case

What is the right to counsel?

right to counsel in all “critical stages” of criminal prosecution after judicial proceedings have begun

Right to a speedy trial begins when?

Once the defendant is charged with a crime

Right to a jury trial applies to serious offenses involving what?

Imprisonment of 6 months or more

What is the right to confront witnesses?

A defendant has the right to confront adverse witnesses

The right to counsel is offense specific, meaning

Police can question a defendant about a separate offense without the presence of the attorney

The government cannot place a paid, undisclosed informant in a defendants cell once what happens

The defendant is indicted or charged

Ineffectiveness assistance of counsel would be if?

1. The attorneys performance fell below the standard of care

2. The trial would have ended differently but for the attorneys incompetency

What is pro-se?

You have the right to defend yourself in court

Defendant has a right to a jury of at least how many people

6

Jury of peers

Jurors must be from a representative cross-section of the community

Guilt pleas must be what 2 things

Voluntary and intelligent

A judge must inform the defendant of what in the case of a guilty plea?

The nature of the charge, critical elements of the offense, max and mandatory minimum penalty, pleading guilty waives the right to trial, and they can choose not to plea guilty

The right to confront witnesses is not absolute if

Important public purpose exists and/or a defendant is disruptive and removed from the courtroom

8th amendment does what 3 things

Entitles to bail for non-capital offenses, prohibits cruel/unusual punishment, all punishments must match the offense

Regarding the death penalty, a judge must do what

Instruct the jury and the jury must consider mitigating facts

A trial court can do what in the case of the death penalty

Reduce a death penalty to life without parole

What two groups of people cannot receive the death penalty?

Minors and mentally incompetent

The death penalty generally applies to the following capitol offenses

Murder, robbery, treason, espionage, terrorism, or other felonies resulting in a death

Misidentification prohibits what

Unnecessarily suggestive identification processes

What is voluntariness?

A confession must be voluntary under the totality of the circumstances

What is due process?

The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt

What is prior restraint?

Any government action preventing a communication from reaching the public

What must the government prove when it adopts a content‑based prior restraint on speech?

It must show that the restriction is the least restrictive alternative to achieve a compelling or significant government interest

What was the reason for the Schenck v US court case?

Schenk (Socialist) was convicted of distributing anti-draft leaflets in violation of the Espionage Act during WWI

What was the result of the Schenck v US case?

Created the clear & present danger test

Clear and Present Danger test?

Says free speech can be restricted if the words are used of a nature and in circumstances that create a clear and present danger

Abram’s v US case facts?

Russian immigrants were convicted of publishing and distributing seditious pamphlets

Abram’s v US ruling?

The government can suppress speech if it had a tendency to produce evils congress has a right to prevent (Bad Tendency Doctrine)

What 4 Acts did congress pass to target communism?

Smith Act, Taft-Hartley Act, McCarran Act, and Communist Control Act

Smith Act did what?

Illegalized speech, lit, and organized groups that advocated for the overthrow of the government by force

Taft-Hartley Act did what?

Said labor union officers must sign sworn statements that they were not affiliated with a communist party or group

McCarran Act did what?

Said that the communist action groups must register with DOJ and disclose members (excluded them from government and defense jobs)

Communist Control Act did what?

Defined the CP as a treasonable conspiracy against the US Govt

Dennis v US case facts?

Dennis (secretary general of the USCP) and 10 others convicted for violating the Smith Act

Dennis v US Court ruling?

Applied the Bad Tendency Act

Yates v US case facts?

14 members of the CP were convicted

Yates v US case ruling?

Distinguish between abstract doctrine (protected) and actual incitement of illegal action (not protected.) The govt must prove the accused advocated for illegal conduct

Gitlow v NY case facts?

Gitlow distributed socialist pamphlets in a violation of a NY criminal anarchy law

Gitlow v NY court ruling?

Upheld conviction and applied the Bad Tendency Doctrine