Posc 444 3/24

Midterm Extension Announcement

• Extension given until Wednesday at 11:59 PM for the midterm.

• Students who already submitted can edit and resubmit before the deadline.

Fourth Amendment Overview

• Text of the Fourth Amendment:

• Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

• Requires warrants based on probable cause, specifying the place to be searched and the persons/items to be seized.

• Key Clauses:

• Person's, Houses, Papers, and Effects: Identifying what is protected.

• Warrant Clause: Details the necessity of obtaining a warrant.

• Reasonableness Clause: Searches must be reasonable, often requiring probable cause.

Key Supreme Court Case: Mapp v. Ohio

• Established the Exclusionary Rule: Illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in court, expanding specifics of the Fourth Amendment to the states.

• Importance of Reasonableness: Probable cause is necessary for obtaining a warrant.

Olmstead Test vs. Katz Test

• Olmstead Test: Focuses on trespassing and physical contact to assess searches.

• Katz Test: Emphasizes the expectation of privacy.

• Case: U.S. v. Jones

• Revived the Olmstead test by asserting the importance of both physical and privacy invasions, allowing both Katz and Olmstead tests.

Third Party Doctrine

• Discussed in Smith v. Maryland: No expectation of privacy for information revealed to third parties.

• Relevance in Carpenter v. U.S.: The court ruled that historical cell site location info requires a warrant, highlighting privacy issues with technological advancements.

Terry v. Ohio Case

• Introduced Stop and Frisk: Cops can stop individuals based on reasonable articulable suspicion rather than full probable cause.

• Government Interests:

• Disarming individuals suspected of carrying weapons.

• Preventing immediate criminal activity.

• Justice Opinions: Justice White expressed the need for citizens to understand their rights during police stops.

Chimel v. California

• Case Summary: Officers entered Chimel's home with an arrest warrant, not a search warrant, and found evidence without legal backing.

• Wingspan Rule: Searches can occur within an arrested individual's immediate reach, but cannot extend beyond that without a search warrant.

Challenging Limits of Consent

• Issues of consent arise when one party allows police to search areas solely belonging to another individual.

• Exigent Circumstances: Allow law enforcement to act instantly without warrants to prevent evidence destruction.

• Automobile Exception: Cars have less protection under the Fourth Amendment; probable cause suffices without a search warrant.

99 Problems by Jay-Z

• Example of Fourth Amendment concerns: Jay-Z describes how being pulled over connects to discussions of reasonable suspicion vs. probable cause.

• Police must have proper justification to search vehicles and individuals without violating Fourth Amendment protections.

Midterm Extension Announcement

• An extension has been granted until Wednesday at 11:59 PM for the midterm exam.

• This extension allows all students who have already submitted their exams the opportunity to make edits and resubmit their work before the new deadline to improve their grades or clarify any misunderstandings in their responses.

Fourth Amendment Overview

• Text of the Fourth Amendment:

• The amendment protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.

• It necessitates the requirement of warrants to be issued based on probable cause, which must specifically outline the location to be searched as well as the persons or items to be seized.

• Key Clauses:

  • Person's, Houses, Papers, and Effects: This clause clearly identifies the scope of what privacy is entitled to protection under the amendment, emphasizing the importance of personal space and property.

  • Warrant Clause: It emphasizes the necessity of securing a warrant before conducting a search, thereby safeguarding against arbitrary intrusions.

  • Reasonableness Clause: This establishes that searches must not only be conducted with a warrant but must also be reasonable in nature. Probable cause plays a crucial role in establishing the validity of such searches.

Key Supreme Court Case: Mapp v. Ohio

• Established the Exclusionary Rule, which states that evidence obtained unlawfully cannot be utilized in a court of law, effectively expanding the specific protections of the Fourth Amendment to include all states.

• Importance of Reasonableness: This ruling underscored the necessity of probable cause as a fundamental requirement for obtaining a warrant, to balance governmental interests against individual rights.

Olmstead Test vs. Katz Test

• Olmstead Test: This test focuses primarily on literal trespassing or physical intrusion to determine if a search occurred.

• Katz Test: This recognizes the critical factor of the individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy, thereby offering broader protection in modern contexts such as technology and communication.

• Case: U.S. v. Jones: This case revived aspects of the Olmstead test by asserting that both physical intrusion and violations of privacy play significant roles in assessing the legality of a search. The court determined that either form of invasion can constitute a violation of Fourth Amendment protections.

Third Party Doctrine

• Discussed in Smith v. Maryland, this doctrine posits that individuals do not hold an expectation of privacy regarding information they voluntarily disclose to third parties, such as phone companies.

• Relevance in Carpenter v. U.S.: In this ruling, the court determined that historical cell site location information is considered sensitive data that requires a warrant before it can be accessed due to underlying privacy concerns brought on by technological advancement.

Terry v. Ohio Case

• Introduced the concept of Stop and Frisk, permitting police officers to stop individuals when they have a reasonable articulable suspicion that the person is involved in criminal activity, rather than needing the higher threshold of probable cause.

• Government Interests:

  • The emphasis is on disarming individuals who may be suspected of carrying weapons, ensuring public safety.

  • It also aims to prevent imminent criminal activity by allowing law enforcement to investigate further based on reasonable suspicion.

• Justice Opinions: Justice White articulated the necessity for citizens to be aware of their rights when approached by law enforcement, advocating for informed citizenry amidst these interactions.

Chimel v. California

• Case Summary: In this case, officers entered Chimel's residence armed with an arrest warrant; however, they proceeded to conduct a search without a separate search warrant, uncovering evidence that led to a conviction deemed illegal.

• Wingspan Rule: This rule posits that searches may be conducted within the immediate physical reach of the individual being arrested, but searches extending beyond this reach must be backed up by a valid search warrant.

Challenging Limits of Consent

• Challenges arise when considering the concept of consent if one party grants police permission to search property that solely belongs to another party, often leading to legal disputes regarding the legality of such searches.

• Exigent Circumstances: These provide law enforcement with the leeway to act swiftly without obtaining warrants if they believe that waiting for a warrant may lead to the destruction of evidence or pose a danger.

• Automobile Exception: The legal precedent sets that vehicles have a lesser degree of protection under the Fourth Amendment, allowing law enforcement to conduct searches based on probable cause without the necessity of a search warrant.

99 Problems by Jay-Z

• This song effectively illustrates the nuances of Fourth Amendment concerns as Jay-Z narrates experiences of being pulled over, which provoke discussions surrounding topics of reasonable suspicion versus probable cause.

• The lyrics highlight the obligation of police officers to have justifiable reasons for searching vehicles and individuals, all while respecting the rights afforded by the Fourth Amendment to avoid constitutional violations.