The congressional efforts to criminalize obscenity on

This preview shows page 9 - 11 out of 19 pages.

the Congressional efforts to criminalize obscenity on the InternetProof and IntentDefendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubtMost serious crimes require proof of the defendant’s mens rea, or criminal intentDefendant must have had capacity to form criminal intentThree types of incapacity recognized: intoxication, infancy, and insanityCriminal ProcedureArrestand bookingof defendantArrest reportfiled with prosecutorIf defendant charged, complaint filedCriminal ProcedureIf probable cause exists, formal charge – informationor indictment – filed with courtArraignmentof defendant in which defendant enters a pleaGuilty, not guilty, nolo contendere(no contest)Defendant who pleads not guilty and faces incarceration for more than six months may choose a jury trialBench trial (judge only) also available Constitutional ProtectionsFourth Amendment protects persons against unreasonable and arbitrary searches and seizures Interpreted by Supreme Court to protect a reasonable expectation of privacyGeneral rule: warrantless searches are unreasonable (unconstitutional)SeeUnited States v. HallWhat is a Search?
What is a Search?But the Supreme Court in Kyllo v. United States, held a device not in public use to examine what would otherwise be hidden isa search, thus presumptively unreasonable without a warrantWarrantless SearchesSupreme Court has held that constitutional warrantless searchesinclude: Area within an arrestee’s immediate controlPremises police enter in hot pursuit of an armed suspectStop-and-frisk searches for weaponsInventory searches of property (e.g., briefcase, automobile) in an arrestee’s possessionConsensual searchesExigent circumstances (Kentucky v. King)The Exclusionary RulePrevents the use of evidence seized in an illegal search in a subsequent trial of the defendant Supreme Court has narrowed operation of the ruleSee Hudson v. MichiganThe Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment provides a privilege or protection against compelled testimonial self-incrimination Practical meaning: a person may remain silent if making a statement would assist the government in prosecuting the person Miranda warningssafeguard the rightAlso prohibits prosecutorial comments at trial about the defendant’s failure to testifyScope of Fifth AmendmentSelf-incrimination privilegeapplies toTestimonial admissions, so police may compel a defendant to provide non-testimonial evidence (fingerprints, body fluids, hair)Applies only to humans (not corporations)Applies only if a defendant could be charged with a crime (not merely a civil lawsuit)

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture