Fourth I. Amendment search and seizure of evidence a. What is a search? any violation of a persons expectation or privacy i. What is a seizure? exercise of control by a police officer ii. What is an unreasonable search? a search and seizure is fine as long as its reasonable term is determined by the facts of the individual case iii. To be a reasonable search: 1. Need warrant or: 2. Is an exception of the warrant clause b. Warrant of Exception i. Warrant 1. Probable cause 2. Describes place to be searched and what is to be seized 3. Issued by a neutral magistrate 4. Good faith exception (United States vs. Leon: evidence obtained when exercising an invalid search warrant is still admissible if officers are acting in good faith) a. When police are serving a bad warrant that they believe to be a good warrant then if it is in good faith then the evidence can be used ii. Exceptions 1. Emergency situations (Warder vs. Hayden) 2. Incident to an arrest (Chimel vs. California) allows search of person and anything within the offenders grabbing area a. Pursuit 3. Plain View if an officer is legally in a place where they are allowed to be, then the search is good a. Arizona vs. Hicks officer moved stereo equipment to see serial numbers to find out if stolen or not b. Protective sweeps when police enter house they can check through house quickly to check for own safety (no opening anything where people couldnt hide) 4. Automobile (Carroll vs. US) when someone is in a car there is a risk of losing evidence a. Officers cannot stop a car for no reason (Brown versus Texas) b. If an officer stops a car he can ask the driver and everyone in the car to put their hands on the hood officers safety is more important than someones individual privacy c. Officer has a right to ask you for your license and registration. If probable cause he can search entire care including trunk without a warrant d. In automobile stops, searches that lead to arrest can result in search of the entire vehicle
e. Stop and frisk (Terry vs. Ohio) based on reasonable suspicion officers can stop a person and do a limited pat down search the only thing officers can search for is weapons 5. If a search is unreasonable a. Evidence is excluded (exclusionary rule) i. Weeks versus United States THIS IS THE FEDERAL CASE THAT ESTABLISHED THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE Weeks is suspected of selling lottery tickets the through mail Supreme Court Decision if some of Weeks property had been illegally seized, then the remainder of the property is also considered to be illegally seized ii. Silverthorne Lumber Co. vs. US (1918) gives us the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine accused of not paying taxes and federal agents wanted the company books which they seized without a warrant and made copies the supreme court overturned the conviction because they ruled that evidence illegally seized cannot be used in a trial, therefore, neither can evidence which derives from an illegal seizure iii. Mapp v. Ohio (1964) applied exclusionary rule to the states Mapp was suspected of hiding a bombing suspect Mapp refused police admittance police forced their way in showing a blank warrant bombing suspect was not found but they found pornographic material in the basement b. Rationales i. Protects against police misconduct ii. Judicial integrity iii. Deter police misconduct II. Fifth Amendment a. History i. Third Degree ii. Physically Coercive Environment 1. Brown vs. Mississippi noose around neck of man to get rape confession officers cannot touch, kick, or beat a suspect in order to get a confession iii. Psychologically coercive environment 1. Miranda v. Arizona a. You have the right to remain silent b. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law
c. You have the right to talk to a lawyer and have him present with you while you are being questioned d. If you cannot afford a lawyer one will be appointed to represent you before any questioning, if you wish 2. Impacts on Criminal Justice System a. 70% of people still void their rights and confess after being read their rights 3. Evolution of the fifth a. New York v. Quarles public safety exception to Miranda rights b. Michigan v. Harvey belief that you are talking to a private citizen voids Miranda rights c. Illinois v. Perkins
I. Policing section a. History and the dilemmas of policing b. Contemporary Policing c. Police Corruption i. History 1. First police department 1844, immediate problems with extortion and corruptions. NYPD: corruption scandals in 20 year cycles 2. Wickersham Commission 3. Knapp Commission a. Grass Eaters accept gratuities, but dont pursue corruption opportunities aggressively b. Meat-Eaters Work hours aggressively seeking out situations they can exploit for financial gain