Huigens F07 Criminal Procedure outline

Huigens F07 Criminal Procedure outline - Criminal Procedure...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Criminal Procedure Outline Spring 2001 Page 1 I. Due Process of Law A. Applying the Bill of Rights to the States through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment 1. A particular right in the Bill of Rights applies to states only if the right is essential to the concept of ordered liberty . Palko v. Connecticut (state allowed to appeal criminal verdict, since this type of double jeopardy is not essential to liberty; later overruled). 2. The due process clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits things that "shock the conscience ." Rochin v. California (extracting objects involuntarily from defendant's body for use as evidence violates due process). B. Which Amendments apply to the States? 1. An old controversy. Adamson v. California (privilege against self- incrimination does not apply to states; later overruled). a) Frankfurter: 14th Amendment does not automatically apply Bill of Rights to states. b) Black: 14th Amendment automatically applies all the Bill of Rights to the states. 2. The 6th Amendment (right to jury) applies to states. Duncan v. Louisiana (right to jury is fundamental to liberty; Harlan's dissent: how to decide what is fundamental?). a) Note: no constitutional right to a non-jury trial. Singer v. U.S. 3. Non-incorporated Bill of Rights: 2d Amd (guns); 3rd Amd (soldiers); 5th Amd (grand jury);7th Amd (civil jury); 8th Amd (bail).
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Spring 2001 Page 2 II. The Fourth Amendment: Arrest and Search and Seizure A. Probable cause 1. Probable cause is the reasonable belief that crime is more probable than not; suspicion backed by reason . Draper v. U.S. (information from reliable informant is sufficient for probable clause). 2. Measure of probable cause: totality of circumstances approach. Illinois v. Gates (when is informant information sufficient for probable cause? Look at reliability of informant and corroborating details.). 3. Policy: balancing interest of protecting people from the state and protecting society from crime. B. The warrant requirement 1. Arrest : requires probable cause but no warrant a) Warrantless arrest on probable cause does not violate 4th Amendment. United States v. Watson. b) Police can enter home if they have an arrest warrant. But warrantless, nonconsensual entry into suspect’s home for a routine felony arrest violates 4th Amendment, absent exigent circumstances. Payton v. New York. (Is this still good law?) 2. Search : requires probable cause and a warrant , absent exigent circumstances. a) Exception : search incident to lawful arrest requires no warrant or probable cause. b) Probable cause for stop justifies warrantless search and seizure regardless of police motivation for stop ; police intent not part of the equation. Whren v. U.S. (stop based on probable cause to believe there was a traffic violation is reasonable, so search of defendant was reasonable). Problem: racial profiling c) Restrictions on warrantless search incident to arrest (i.e. fruit of poisonous tree exclusion) requires that defendant be seized
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/14/2008 for the course LAW 7118 taught by Professor Halberstam during the Fall '02 term at Yeshiva.

Page1 / 24

Huigens F07 Criminal Procedure outline - Criminal Procedure...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online