Criminal Justice chapter 6

Define the exclusionary rule, and identify the situations in which it applies.

By barring the use of illegally obtained evidence in court, the exclusionary rule is designed to deter police from violating citizens' rights during criminal investigations. The Supreme Court has created several exceptions to the exclusionary rule, including the "inevitable discovery" rule and the "good faith" exception in defective warrant situations.

2. What is the plain view doctrine?

view doctrine permits officers to observe and seize illegal items that are visible to them when they are in a location in which they are legally permitted to be.

13. What are the main exceptions to the exclusionary rule?

A "good faith" exception in warrant situations; cases in which evidence would have been discovered by the police inevitably anyway ("inevitable discovery" rule).

1. What is a search?

A government intrusion into an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy.

consent search

A permissible warrantless search of a person, vehicle, home, or other location based on a person with proper authority or the reasonable appearance of proper authority voluntarily granting permission for the search to take place.

reasonable suspicion

A police officer's belief based on articulable facts that would be recognized by others in a similar situation as indicating that criminal activity is afoot and necessitates further investigation that will intrude on an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy.

probable cause

An amount of reliable information indicating that it is more likely than not that evidence will be found in a specific location or that a specific person is guilty of a crime.

3. What is the difference between an arrest and a stop?

An arrest requires probable cause and involves taking someone into custody for prosecution, whereas a stop is a brief deprivation of freedom of movement based on reasonable suspicion.

6. What is an exigent circumstance?

An urgent situation in which evidence might be destroyed, a suspect might escape, or the public would be endangered if police took the time to seek a warrant for a search or an arrest.

Tennessee v. Garner (1985)

Deadly force may not be used against an unarmed and fleeing suspect unless necessary to prevent the escape and unless the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious injury to the officers or others.

"public safety" exception

Exception to Miranda requirements that permits police to immediately question a suspect in custody without providing any warnings when public safety would be jeopardized by their taking the time to supply the warnings.

"good faith" exception

Exception to the exclusionary rule that permits the use of improperly obtained evidence when police officers acted in honest reliance on a defective statute, a warrant improperly issued by a magistrate, or a consent to search by someone who lacked authority to give such permission.

totality of circumstances

Flexible test established by the Supreme Court for identifying whether probable cause exists that permits the judge to determine whether the available evidence is both sufficient and reliable enough to issue a warrant.

stop

Government officials' interference with an individual's freedom of movement for a duration that typically lasts less than one hour and only rarely extends for as long as several hours.

United States v. Drayton (2002)

Judicial decision declaring that police officers are not required to inform people of their right to decline to be searched when police ask for consent to search.

Nix v. Williams (1984)

Legal decision in which the Supreme Court created the "inevitable discovery" exception to the exclusionary rule.

stop-and-frisk search

Limited search approved by the Supreme Court in Terry v. Ohio, that permits police officers to pat down the clothing of people on the street if there is reasonable suspicion of dangerous criminal activity.

10. How have officers adapted their practices in light of Miranda?

Officers ask questions before suspects are in custody, use techniques to pretend to befriend or empathize with suspects being questioned, and misinform suspects about the existence of evidence demonstrating their guilt.

9. What is the "public safety" exception?

Officers can ask questions of suspects in custody without first providing Miranda warnings when public safety would be threatened by their taking the time to supply the warnings.

plain view doctrine

Officers may examine and use as evidence, without a warrant, contraband or evidence that is in open view at a location where they are legally permitted to be.

8. What are Miranda rights?

Officers must inform suspects, before custodial interrogation, of their right to remain silent, the prosecution's authority to use any of the suspect's statements, the right to the presence of an attorney during questioning, and the right to have an attorney appointed if the suspect is too poor to hire one.

inventory search

Permissible warrantless search of a vehicle that has been "impounded"—meaning that it is in police custody—so that police can make a record of the items contained in the vehicle.

Describe situations in which police officers can examine property and conduct searches without obtaining a warrant.

Searches are considered "reasonable" and may be conducted without warrants in specific circumstances that present special needs beyond the normal purposes of law enforcement. For example, borders and airports always allow searches without warrants. Limited searches may be conducted without warrants when officers have reasonable suspicions to justify a stop-and-frisk for weapons on the streets, when officers make a lawful arrest, under exigent circumstances, when people voluntarily consent to searches of their persons or property, and in certain situations involving automobiles.

seizures

Situations in which police officers use their authority to deprive people of their liberty or property and that must not be "unreasonable" according to the Fourth Amendment.

United States v. Leon (1984)

Supreme Court decision announcing the "good faith" exception to the exclusionary rule.

Weeks v. United States (1914)

Supreme Court decision applying the exclusionary rule as the remedy for improper searches by federal law enforcement officials.

Terry v. Ohio (1968)

Supreme Court decision endorsing police officers' authority to stop and frisk suspects on the streets when there is reasonable suspicion that they are armed and involved in criminal activity.

Wolf v. Colorado (1949)

Supreme Court decision in which the Fourth Amendment was applied against searches by state and local police officers, but the exclusionary rule was not imposed as the remedy for violations of the Fourth Amendment by these officials.

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

Supreme Court decision that applied the exclusionary rule as the remedy for improper searches by state and local officials.

Chimel v. California (1969)

Supreme Court decision that endorsed warrantless searches for weapons and evidence in the immediate vicinity of people who are lawfully arrested.

"inevitable discovery" rule

Supreme Court ruling that improperly obtained evidence can be used when it would later have been inevitably discovered by the police.

Explain the purpose of the privilege against compelled self-incrimination.

The Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination helps protect citizens against violence and coercion by police and helps to maintain the legitimacy and integrity of the legal system. The Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona requires officers to inform suspects of specific rights before custodial questioning, although officers have adapted their practices to accommodate this rule so that they can question people without any impediment from the warning. Several exceptions to the warning have been created by the Supreme Court.

Describe the extent of police officers' authority to stop people and to conduct searches of people, their vehicles, and other property.

The Supreme Court has defined rules for the circumstances and justifications for stops, searches, and arrests in light of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. The plain view doctrine permits officers to visually examine and use as evidence, without a warrant, any contraband or criminal evidence that is in open sight when the officers are in a place where they are legally permitted to be. Most stops must be supported by reasonable suspicion; an arrest or a search warrant must be supported by enough information to constitute probable cause. Police use of deadly force occurs infrequently and can no longer be applied to unarmed fleeing felons.

11. Why was the exclusionary rule created and eventually applied to the states?

The exclusionary rule was created to deter officers from violating people's rights, and the Supreme Court considers it an essential component of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

4. What do police officers need to demonstrate in order to obtain a warrant?

The existence of probable cause by the totality of circumstances in the case.

reasonable expectation of privacy

The objective standard developed by courts for determining whether a government intrusion into an individual's person or property constitutes a search because it interferes with the individual's interests that are normally protected from government examination.

exclusionary rule

The principle that illegally obtained evidence must be excluded from trial.

12. What are the criticisms of the exclusionary rule?

The rule is criticized for hampering police investigations and permitting some guilty people to go free.

Explain how police officers seek warrants in order to conduct searches and make arrest.

To obtain a warrant, police officers present an affidavit (sworn statement) verifying the accuracy of the information that they present to the judge and that they hope the judge will regard as constituting probable cause to search or make an arrest.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

U.S. Supreme Court decision declaring that suspects in custody must be informed of their rights to remain silent and be represented during questioning.

Illinois v. Gates (1983)

U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the flexible totality of circumstances test for determining the existence of the probable cause needed for obtaining a search warrant.

7. What two elements must be present for a valid consent to permit a warrantless search?

Voluntary consent by a person with proper authority to consent.

5. In what situations do law enforcement's special needs justify stopping an automobile without reasonable suspicion?

Warrantless stops of automobiles are permitted at international borders and sobriety checkpoints (unless barred within a specific state by its own supreme court) or when there is reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation or other wrongdoing.

exigent circumstances

When there is an immediate threat to public safety or the risk that evidence will be destroyed, officers may search, arrest, or question suspects without obtaining a warrant or following other usual rules of criminal procedure.

affidavit

Written statement of fact, supported by oath or affirmation, submitted to judicial officers to fulfill the requirements of probable cause for obtaining a warrant.

search and seizure concepts

fourth amendment prohibits from "unreasonable searches and seizures"

search

government officials' examination of and hunt for evidence on a person or in a place in a manner that intrudes on reasonable expectations of privacy