Rights of the Accused - Summary
4th Amendment
Unreasonable searches and seizures are prohibited.
Warrants require probable cause, supported by oath, specifically describing the place and items to be seized.
Searches:
Consent allows searches.
Reasonable suspicion allows further investigation.
Probable cause allows warrants or searches/seizures.
Warrantless searches: exigent circumstances, plain view, require probable cause.
Katz v. United States (1967):
4th Amendment applies if a person has a subjective expectation of privacy, and that expectation is objectively reasonable.
Weeks v. United States (1913):
The government may only search a home with a warrant based on sworn evidence and describing the search target with reasonable particularity.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961):
Evidence obtained in violation of rights is inadmissible at trial.
Exceptions to Exclusionary Rule:
Attenuation of the "taint".
Good faith.
Independent source.
Inevitable discovery.
Whren v. United States (1996):
Probable cause for a traffic violation justifies stopping a car.
Probable cause that a car has contraband justifies searching it.
New Jersey v. TLO (1985):
School searches require neither a warrant nor probable cause.
Must be justified and reasonable in scope.
5th Amendment
Guarantees due process and the right to remain silent; protects against double jeopardy.
“No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…”
Miranda v. Arizona (1966):
Statements from custodial interrogation are inadmissible unless suspect is advised of their rights (to remain silent, to an attorney), understands them, and waives them.
6th Amendment
Guarantees the right to counsel and a speedy and public trial by jury.
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall…have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963):
State and federal courts must provide attorneys to criminal defendants who cannot afford them.
8th Amendment
Prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
The death penalty must be imposed fairly, giving individual consideration to the defendant and the crime.
Death Penalty Restrictions:
Furman v. Georgia (1972): Arbitrary and capricious use is unconstitutional.
Gregg v. Georgia (1976): Careful use in murder cases is constitutional.
Woodson v. North Carolina (1976): Mandatory sentences for non-murder crimes are unconstitutional.
Coker v. Georgia (1977): Unconstitutional for rape of an adult.
Edmund v. Florida (1982): Unconstitutional if the defendant did not intend to kill.
Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008): Unconstitutional for rape of a child if the child survives.
“Evolving standards of decency” determine what is cruel and unusual.
Ford v. Wainwright (1986): Unconstitutional for insane persons who don't understand their impending execution.
Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988): Unconstitutional for minors.
Atkins v. Virginia (2002): Unconstitutional for persons with “mental retardation”.
Roper v. Simmons (2002): Unconstitutional for minors.
Punishment must not have a “substantial” or “objectively intolerable” risk of harm.
Wilkerson v. Utah (1879): Death by firing squad is constitutional.
In re Kemmler (1890): Death by electrocution is constitutional.
Glossip v. Gross (2015): Lethal injection is constitutional.