Crim_Law_Unknown9 - Incorporation of due process rights to...

This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 9 pages.

Incorporation of due process rights to state prosecutions. Case-by-case basis Only minimums should be required of the states to allow innovation All but 7 th amendment guarantees have been incorporated Search and Seizure Timeline: Accosting Non-consentual stop/frisk highly intrusive invasion No justification Articulable suspicion (Warrantless) Probable Cause (Warranted) What areas are protected: Katz (37) Old rule: Prevented governmental intrusion into protected physical space – Goldman/Olmstead rule Subjective intent to have privacy: Intent must have been manifested through positive action In their persons: “What a person seeks to preserve as private.” Katz Conversations are considered private if some action is taken to preserve contents. Actions are protected inside the house if positive & effective action is taken to prevent viewing of actions. “Houses, papers and effects:” Only common-law curtilage is protected Any governmental interference with a legitimate property right is protected. Seizure of small amounts of chemical for assay is not an unreasonable interference with the property right. However, mandatory urine or blood tests are seizures, as the gathering process is an unreasonable interference of the property right & the tests can show legitimate secrets (disease, pregnancy, prescription drugs, etc.) Abandoned things or places are not protected. Expectation of privacy must be objectively reasonable Anything voluntarily exposed to the public is not protected: VINs on cars, inadvertent disclosures, consent, phone numbers dialed, checks exposed to banks Legal public access to information grants police access without 4 th amendment protection. Chemical tests for contraband, drug-sniffing dogs/pigs are not invasions of 4 th amendment rights as the investigation cannot uncover legal activity. Content of prison cells are not protected because these are things people have no objective right to believe are not secret. Who may not search: Police Agents of police Search procedures taken by private entities required by federal regulations Any search/seizure with ‘clear indices of Gov’t encouragement, endorsement or participation” However, public officials may “re-search” what was discovered by a non-agent private party. Civil officials in condemnation proceedings or other interference with property rights. Warrants Why: Promote review by uninvolved party – magistrate Prevent hindsight from manufacturing probable cause Provide limits to the search based on the uninvolved judgment. What constitutes probable cause: Facts making it probable that it is more likely than not that illegal activity has occurred.
Image of page 1

Subscribe to view the full document.

Image of page 2
  • Spring '09
  • CARSON
  • Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern