chapter 4

exigent circumstances

Hot pursuit Emergency aid Serious crime in progress Prevent destruction of evidence 1. Must have PC to secure warrant 2. Objectively reasonable belief that there are persons inside who will destroy the evidence if delayed by getting warrant In hot pursuit police may enter a constitutionally protected area such as a home and conduct a search for a fleeing person. Scope is limited to searching for the suspect fleeing Emergency aid. Police called to someone passed out in the house. They enter without warrant to deal with medical emergencies. Entry without warrant is ok but scope is limited to dealing with the emergency situation Prevent destruction of evidence police must have probable cause to believe the evidence is present and a reasonable belief that the evidence will be destroyed if left alone until a warrant can be secured. Can only enter without warrant and secure premises until a warrant is obtained

Consent Exception examples

Example, if police want to search my house and i only consent to search the living room and kitchen, then they can only search the living room and kitchen. Would need a warrant to search the rest of the house. If i give general consent to search my car it is reasonable to think officer would look in center console, glove box, containers in the car, trunk. General consent to search house would include all rooms and closets etc. Third party consent occurs where two or more people share an area that is protected under 4th amendment such as a house or a car and one party gives consent. Consent is ok if one party to a shared house or car gives consent. Consent only extends to areas that both parties share. Private bedrooms, bags, purse, containers, or luggage of non-consenting party may not be searched by third party consent Once a police officer is given consent to search he can seize all items under that consent. Once consent is revoked search must stop. All items seized up to that point police can take as evidence. Revocation not retroactive to prevent police from seizing items already found while consent was still good

katz v us

Facts: Katz was convicted of transmitting wagering information based on evidence overheard by the FBI who attached a recording device to the exterior of a public phone booth used by Katz. Issue: Did the police's action constitute a search under the 4th amendment? Holding: Yes Analysis: A person who occupies a phone booth, shuts the door, and pays the tool has a reasonable expectation that this phone conversation is private and this expectation is entitled 4th amendment protection Katz gave a person a right to be constitutionally protected from searches where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This included places like phone booths and phone calls from there. Despite new technology 4th amendment applies to areas where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy

nonsearch activity

Free Zone - investigative activity doesn't infringe on a suspect's privacy or property rights or a suspect's freedom to go about his or her business. Abandoned property Investigation of things in public view Canine sniffs to detect drugs A search has two components (1) police activity (2) an invasion of a suspect's reasonable expectation of privacy. All the above lack these Private party search (employer/employee, principal/student, luggage left in custody of airline that airline employees view then turn over to police, sigh at VanAndel arena says all bags are subject to a security search upon entry. If VanAndel employee finds contraband and turns it over to police not a search for fourth amendment No reasonable expectation of privacy in abandoned property No reasonable expectation of privacy in things exposed to public view. Includes police looking through an undraped window, or looking through a knot hole in fence

categories of searches

Full Search Purpose: gather evidence Grounds: SW or recognized exception to the warrant requirement Limited Weapons Search Purpose: disarm person to protect officer's safety Grounds: RS that a person lawfully detained is armed & dangerous Inventory Search Purpose: catalogue property that police have taken into custody Grounds: authority to impound and adherence to police dept. Regulations governing conduct of inventory searches

search incident to a lawful arrest

Full search of suspect, not limited to pat down Includes area within the suspect's immediate control

entry and search premises with a warrant

1. Authority to detain occupants Prevents flight of possible suspects Minimizes risk of harm to occupants and officers Promotes orderly completion of search When executing a search warrant officers may detain the occupants. Above lists the reasons why. 2. Authority to frisk persons present Need reasonable suspicion Unless something like drug house where people present likely to be armed Terry principles of reasonable suspicion apply unless it is an area people are likely to be armed. Search warrant at indoor gun range, or drug house 3. Authority to search occupants for items described Only when expressly permitted by warrant Search conducted incident to lawful arrest PC to believe that person searched has items described in warrant

Plain View Exception to Warrant Requirement

1. Initial intrusion that brings PO in contact with the evidence is lawful 2. It is immediately apparent that the object viewed is associated with criminal activity 3. PO las lawful right of access to it If all three present, then privacy interest of suspect is loss Does not have to be accidental discovery

requirements for execution of a search warrant

1. Only person to whom the warrant is addressed may execute it 2. Must be presented upon execution 3. Knock and announce presence unless will jeopardize safety or risk destruction of evidence 4. Must be executed within a reasonable short time after issuance (items moved, suspects moved, stale.) 5. Inventory of property seized. Copy to owner and to issuing magistrate/judge

physical intrusion into a constitutionally protected location

1. Persons - parts of a suspect's body/clothing not exposed to the public 2. Houses - includes any premises, structure, or fixture in which a reasonable expectation of privacy exists and buffer zone such as garages and yards known as the curtilage 3. Papers - encompasses letters, journals, recordsm films, and other private documents 4. Personal Affects - encompasses handbags, briefcases, packages, vehicles, luggage and other closed containers Fourth amendment guarantees privacy in persons, houses, papers, and effects. Houses: include homes and a buffer zone i.e. yards, garages, known as the curtilage. Also includes apartments, hotel rooms, dorm room, private offices, warehouses, telephone booths, filing cabinets, and lockers although only houses are mentioned by name

requirements for plain feel seizure during a terry stop

1. Police feel an object in the course of a weapons pat down 2. They immediately recognize the object as "feeling" something like a specific kind of contraband 3. Other circumstances surrounding the encounter reinforce the belief that the object is what it feels like -#3 example, if patting someone down for weapons and plain feek what officer believes is suspected drugs, if officer sees crack pipes, push rods, chore boy or other drug use paraphernalia around then that would be circumstances that the object felt is drugs like the officer suspected

Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule

1. The same evidence inevitably would have been discovered through lawful means 2. The officer acted in objective good faith 3. The illegality related only to the manner of entering to execute a valid SW 4. The evidence is offered for the limited purpose of impeaching the defendant's own testimony or 4. The evidence is offered in a proceeding other than the defendant's criminal trial 1. Police stop car for speeding. Arrest defendant for driving on suspended license. Search entire car incident to arrest and find drugs. Despite illegal search evidence admitted becasue police could have impounded car and found drugs in legal fashion 2. Search warrant signed by Judge without knowing use of false information or reckless disregard for truth but some information found out later is untrue or even if all information is true reviewing court finds no probable cause. Good faith applies. Error lies with judge signing warrant not police. See 240-241 for other examples 3. Example, knock and announce violation won't cause evidence to be suppressed 4. Use of suppressed evidence can be used to prevent a suspect from lying under oath Can use in probation violation hearings, parole hearings, civil cases, administrative hearings etc.

full searches exceptions to warrant requirement

1. consent 2. search incident to lawful arrest 3. automobile exception 4. exigent circumstances

terry search revisited

2 requirements for protective weapons searches 1. The officer must have adequate grounds to initiate the encounter, and 2. The officer has RS that the detainee is armed and could be dangerous Permissible scope Extends to the detainee's person, and my unlocked containers w/in grabbing distance that might contain a weapon Permissible intensity Limited to activity necessary to determine whether the suspect is armed Directed at a person - patting down outer clothing Directed at a container - cursory visual inspection

search of articles not closely associated with the arrested individual's person

Allowed if the arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of them at the time of the search Arizona v. Gant - The Supreme Court ruled that the right to search a motorist's vehicle after his arrest is not a police entitlement Can't search the entire vehicle. Only areas a suspect is within reaching distance of or wingspan area

search of the arrested individual's person

Authority to Perform - a lawful custodial arrest carries automatic authority to search the arrested individual's person, clothing, and articles closely associated with his person that are on or carried by him Authority to perform this search doesn't depend upon the nature of the offense The search may be performed at the scene of arrest, the police station, or both Part of the search incident to arrest exception to the warrant requirement If the arrest occurs inside a home the officers can only search the person, the areas in which arrested person could reach for a weapon (include bags, purses, or containers in suspects possession at time of arrest), items in plain view of that area and that is it. However, police in a home can do a protective sweep of rooms and closets for other suspects who could harm police Arrest outside of home the search is limited to persons, articles in their possession such as bags, purses, or containers, as well as areas around suspect that he could reach to get a weapon Person may be searched more than once incident to arrest, both at scene and later at jail or police station

intensity under a search warrant

Controlled by objects to be seized P.O. may only look where objects are likely to be found; Large items in large rooms, containers, etc... Small items in small containers, envelopes, closets, etc...

protective sweeps

Cursory visual inspection of closets or other spaces immediately adjoining place of arrest inside a residence Purpose: protect officers from hidden cohorts that pose a danger to officers Occurs when police make an arrest inside a residence. They can then do a cursory visual inspection of adjoining places in home for presence of others who may harm the officer(s).

overview of search and seizure

In addition to last lecture's materials (detain & arrest) search and seizure covers: EVIDENCE GATHERING. Searching persons for evidence Searching places and things for evidence Seizing evidence A lot of the same language and principles from chapter 3 apply In addition to governing the arrest or detention of the individual, the Fourth Amendment also governs three other activities that fall under what is known as the law of Search and Seizure. These are largely concerned with evidence gathering by police. And include the three listed above. A lot of the language and rules in chapter 3 seizures of people in arrest and detention situations apply to evidence searches and seizures and the two often must be evaluated by the police at the same time.

search following a custodial arrest

Justification for performing the search To protect the officer's safety, and To prevent persons under arrest from destroying or concealing evidence

sources of search authority

Legal searches require the police to: 1. Act under recognized source of search authority A. search warrant B. terry investigation C. inventory search 2. Confine the search activity to authorized search boundaries

search incident to in-house arrest

Limited to person and area within immediate control Protective sweep - closets, areas people could be hiding Apply for warrant if you want to search further

consent exception

Must be voluntary Based on totality of circumstances Consent obtained by threat of getting SW is considered coerced and invalid Consent obtained by improperly representing that officer has a warrant is invalid People cannot coerce someone into giving consent. Courts will evaluate whether a consent was voluntary based on the totality of the circumstances

particular description of items to be seized

Must describe the items with sufficient particularity to avoid misidentification and to prevent the police from invading privacy to any greater extent than necessary

touching or moving objects outside owners presence

Not a search typically unless police damage the article or delay its return to power. This typically occurs in luggage search cases. Once luggage is turned over to a third party, not a search for police to inspect it as long as it is not damaged or delayed unnecessarily in return to the owner. Police not meaningfully interfering with possession.

seizure of property for use as evidence

Objects that can be seized: 1. Fruits of crime 2. Instrumentailities used to commit a crime 3. Contraband, including anything that is a crime to possess 4. "Mere Evidence" - any other evidence that links a suspect to a crime or furnishes evidence of its commission Need probable cause to seize

technological invasions of suspect's reasonable expectation of privacy

Only 2 limitations on surreptitious surveillance of matters other than communication: Surveillance devices must be employed from a location where the officer has a right to be Police may not use special surveillance equipment that is not generally available to the public to spy on activities inside a residence Post katz police have been given broad authority to use technology to obtain evidence. Only limitations under the law are that surveillance devices must be deployed from an area police have the right to be and they may not use specialized equipment not generally available to the public to conduct the surveillance.

scope under a search warrant

Only good for location described in warrant Usually the address is listed so that entire premises may be searched

scope of consent

Only to places consented to. If general grant of consent then to areas that a reasonable person would believe would be searched: containers within a vehicle, console, glove compartment, etc. 3rd party consent Valid only to the extent that 3rd party has equal access to the area being searched But search of shred dwelling for evidence cannot be based on consent of one party over the objections of another party who is present Does not extend to landlord/tenant or hotel personnel/guest Does extend to parent/minor child Usually extends to parent/adult child's private room, unless evidence suggest otherwise is present (lock on door, keep out signs) Apparent Authority to consent PO believes the person who gave the consent had the authority to do so, but later found out that person did not Valid consent if objectively reasonable to the PO Search will be upheld when third parties give consent if police have a reasonable belief that the third party had the authority to consent to the search Provision in probation/parole order allowing search on "reasonable grounds" Revocation of consent: May revoke consent and prevent further police activity. Not retroactive revocation...

outdoor spaces: areas within open fields

Outdoor spaces are either No fixed formula. consider: The proximity to the home Whether the area is included within an enclosure surrounding the home Whether it is used for family purposes and The steps taken by the residents to shield the area from view by passersby Open fields carry no fourth amendment protection Courts must decide if open spaces are so intimately tied to the home as to merit fourth amendment protection (become part of curtilage) Courts have held it is unlikely a curtilage would extend more than 150 feet beyond the home Curtilage of the home class discussion problem

outdoor spaces: areas within the curtilage

Outdoor spaces are wither Areas within the curtilage The area immediately surrounding the home, which is regularly used for domestic and family purposes, such as garage and yard Carries the same 4th amendment protections as the home Police can enter driveways, walkways, and go knock on door to conduct business like any other deliveryman or member of the public but if they enter a curtilage area to detain people or search for evidence fourth amendment applies. Need warrant or exception to warrant requirement

contents and form warrant

Particular description of place to be searched Must describe the place to be searched with sufficient particularity to allow an executing officer who is unfamiliar with the facts to locate and identify it with reasonable certainty Vehicle: make, model, year, color VIN

facially valid warrant

Particularized description of the place to be searched and items to be seized Good faith exception Even if a warrant is later held to be invalid because of a defect, the evidence seized may be admissible if the P.O. was excusably ignorant of the defect For warrants that are issued by a judge or magistrate to later be held invalid typically requires the officer to knowingly put false information in the warrant or information that contains a reckless disregard for the truth. Otherwise if a warrant is issued an officer can rely on a good faith exception.

brief, limited searches and seizures

Police are allowed to perform brief, limited seizures for investigation when they have a reasonable suspicion that property is connected to criminal activity May conduct brief limited seizure to secure objects pending issue of SW Terry principles apply: Requires (1) reasonable suspicion object is fruits of crime, instrumentality of crime, contraband, or mere evidence. (2) can only detain long enough to confirm or deny suspicion.

vehicle searches incident to an occupant's arrest

Police may perform a vehicle search incident to arrest only if: 1. The arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of search or 2. Police have reason to believe that the vehicle might contain evidence of the crime for which the arrest is made Is arizona v grant revisited Is a more lenient standard than probable cause. Whether a vehicle search will be upheld using this standard depends on the nature of the crime the person is arrested for (arrest for driving on a suspended license is not likely to yield evidence in the car, a drug arrest would). Again, this is only a search of a vehicle incident to arrest on the basis police have reason to believe there might be evidence of the arrested person in the car. If there is no arrest, this does not apply. If there is probable cause to believe evidence of the arrested crime or ANY OTHER CRIME is in the vehicle then automobile exception to warrant requirement kicks in and full search is permitted

warrant standards for full search

Probable Cause that... 1. A crime been committed 2. The items the officer seeks constitute evidence of that offense 3. The items are located at the place to be searched (similar to arrest warranr) Staleness: if too old or location changes Staleness often arises in drug search warrant as seller will try to sell drugs on hand users will use drugs on hand. Search must be done close in time to obtaining warrant or warrant will grow stale.

Limited weapons searches-frisks and protective sweeps

Purpose = to protect officer safety May be done when police have RS that person detained is armed Terry vehicle searches Limited to search for weapons Limited to visual inspection of where weapoon may be found within reach of suspect; floorboards, under sears, console, glove compartment, etc Must have reasonable suspicion that a weapon is present Police may conduct a limited weapons search of a person when they have reasonable suspicion they are armed and dangerous, search limited in scope to pat down or frisk off outer clothing. Terry v ohio is authority for this.Vehicles. Must have reasonable suspicion that the person in the vehicle has a weapon in the vehicle. Scope is limited to above

seizure of property

Reasons 1. Use it as evidence at trial 2. Detain it while conducting a brief investigation into its ownership or contents 3. Prevent it from being moved while applying for a search warrant to open it 4. Impound for safekeeping

search boundaries

Scope: locations that may be searched Intensity: thoroughness with which they may be searched Scope and Intensity of a search may never be greater than necessary to locate the objects for which an officer has search authority

automobile exception

Search of vehicle based on probable cause If probable cause exists to believe that the vehicle contains evidence or contraband then they may lawfully seize May search entire vehicle from engine compartment to trunk May search closed containers within the vehicle Does not extend to occupants' person unless PC to believe the occupants have the evidence in their possession

private property

Search: when police intrude on a suspect's reasonable expectation of privacy or conduct a physical intrusion into a constitutionally protected area. Seizure: when police interfere with a suspect's possessory rights in property. Reasonableness of search and seizure will depend on level of invasiveness

nonsearches

Searches and seizures performed by private parties without government complicity

inventory searches incident to booking an arrestee into jail

Shouldn't be performed until it is determined that the suspect will not be released on bail The purpose is to secure valuables, protect the police department against false claims of loss or theft, and prevent weapons and contraband from being brought into the jail Must be done in compliance with standard police department operating procedures Operation grab and sniff pp 205-207 underscores some of the concepts here. If you need additional examples see pp 205-214

Vehicle Limited Weapons Search

Sole object of the search is weapons The officer must have RS that weapons are located inside a lawfully stopped vehicle The scope of the search is confined to the passenger compartment The intensity is limited to a cursory visual inspection of areas (and containers) inside the passenger compartment in which a weapon would fit

consent searches and seizures

Suspect's home is a location protected by the 4th amendment Physical entry = search = need for a search warrant UNLESS - voluntary consent given Misrepresentation of identity doesn;t destroy the voluntariness of the consent Curious case of the artless art thief on p 167-177 officer misrepresented his identity to gain consent did not destroy the validity of the consent

brief limited seizures

The 4th amendment imposes less rigorous requirements for brief, limited seizures Cant obtain a SW if you only have RS to believe a container houses seizable evidence BUT RS is enough to seize the container for a brief investigation Brief investigation would include only enough time to determine if the object is one you wish to get a search warrant to search or to determine if it is evidence you can seize using an exception to the warrant requirement. Example, and informant tells police that a drug courier will arrive by bus with a load of cocaine in a black Louis Vitton bag. Police conduct surveillance at bus station sees a man with a black bag exiting bus. Police conduct surveillance at bus station see a man with black bag exiting bus. Police briefly detain man and see that bag is Louis Vitton bag. Police continue to detain man and call for a drug dog to sniff bag. Drug dog hits on bag. Police can continue to detain bag and man to get a search warrant to open it. Reasonable suspicion will not get you authority to enter constitutionally protected bags, containers, etc. however, bags can be detained to investigate reasonable suspicion to determine if police have enough PC to get a search warrant

the exclusionary rule

The exclusion of evidence is a criminal defendant's remedy for police violations of his or her constitutional rights Exclusion includes evidence uncovered during an illegal search or seizure AND evidence police discover as a result. Called "fruit of the poisonous tree" For history of the rule see pp 239-240 of textbook. Rule prevents use of evidence in court. Often redults in cases being dismissed Example, police stop defendant for an illegal turn. Police in-car video shows the turn was legal. Accordingly the stop is illegal. Despite fact defendant gave consent to search car and drugs were found, because the initial stop was illegal, any evidence found pursuant to a consent search is fruit of poisonous tree Example, police stop defendant for speeding. Defendant gives consent to search car. Police find drugs in center console. Defendant then revokes consent. Police look in trunk of car after consent revoked and find more drugs. They also find a locked container. They get a search warrant for container and find more drugs. Drugs in center console admitted. Drugs in truck excluded because consent was revoked (revoked consent not retroactive) and drugs in container excluded as fruit of the poisonous tree. (all this assumes no other justification for search is available like automobile exception to warrant requirement).

exigent circumstances exception

The exigent circumstances exception authorizes police to make a warrantless entry when: They have reason to believe that life or property is in imminent danger or that a serious crime is in progress They have reason to believe that evidence will be destroyed or removed unless they act immediately, or They are in hot pursuit of a felon who flees and takes refuge inside Premise searches exception to warrant requirement If reasonable belief evidence will be destroyed scope of search and intensity of search is limited to securing premises/evidence until warrant is obtained Hot pursuit police are limited by scope and intensity to detaining a person, area in his control, plain view, and protective sweep for others who may harm officers. Otherwise need a warrant or another exception to search further

essentials for a lawful search

The officer must act under a recognized source of search authority and Confine the search to authorized search boundaries The scope and intensity of a search may never be greater than necessary to locate the objects for which an officer has search authority Scope and intensity define the search boundaries

vehicle searches based on probable cause ("automobile exception")

The officer must have PC to believe that the vehicle contains criminal evidence or contraband The scope of the search extends to the entire vehicle, from motor compartment to trunk and all the contents The intensity is limited to search activity necessary to find the objects the officer has PC to believe are hidden in vehicle This is different from search of vehicle incident to arrest. No arrest needed to trigger automobile exception. Only probable cause to believe evidence of ANY CRIME is located in the vehicle. Allows for full search either at scene or later or both as long as PC exists

vehicle inventory search

The purpose of the search is to secure the owner's valuables and protect the police department against liability for loss and theft Police must have the legal authority to impound the vehicle Police must follow standard procedures for inventorying the contents of impounded vehicles The scope of the search is governed by these procedures The intensity is limited to activity necessary to catalog and safeguard the items Authority and procedures for the search are derived from written departmental policies which all officers must follow when conducting a vehicle impound

scope and intensity of vehicle search incident to arrest

The scope of the search exends to the entire passenger compartment and all containers located inside, w/o regard to ownership The intensity may be as though as necessary to find offense-related evidence Scope extends to any place in the vehicle that could contain evidence of the crime for which the suspect is arrested. It DOES NOT extend to the trunk or engine compartment. This is not a full search like automobile exception allows Intensity would not allow you to rip up upholstery of vehicle or tear apart engine compartment

premises searches conducted under the authority of a warrant

The scope of the search extends to the residence, curtilage, and all structures and vehicles inside the curtilage Police may search everything found on the premises that is a plausible repository for the objects described in the warrant, regardless of ownership Would help if an officer would identify all these places in the warrant The occupants may be detained while the search is in progress The occupants may be frisked only if police have Terry grounds for a frisk Occupants may be frisked for weapons only upon Terry grounds or if place to search is one where people likely to be armed (i.e. indoor gun range, drug house) The occupants may be searches for the objects listed in the warrant only if: The SW expressly confers this authority The search is incidental to a lawful arrest, or Police have PC to believe that objects of the kind listed in the warrant are secreted on their person

timing of vehicle search incident to arrest

The timing of the search depends on the justification. If the justification is protecting the officer's safety, the search must be performed while the suspect is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment If the justification is reason to believe that the vehicle contains evidence of the crime for which the arrest was made, the search may be postponed until after the arrest scene has been secured Top example is again something that derives from arizona v grant. Can only conduct a search of vehicle incident to arrest for officers safety or evidence if the person is not detained and can reach inside vehicle. Justification is to prevent arrested person from grabbing a weapon prior to being secured or disturbing evidence that may be in the person's area of control. Once person is secured these justifications no longer apply. Bottom is a search of vehicle incident to arrest where police have reason to believe vehicle might contain evidence of crime defendant arrested for. Search must be close in time to the arrest and conducted at the scene before vehicle or arrestee removed from the scene

vehicle searches

Theories for search MVs w/o a warrant: 1. Vehicular limited weapons searches 2. Searches incident to the arrest of a motorist or passenger 3. Searches based on PC to believe that the vehicle contains criminal evidence or contraband (the MV exception) 4. Inventory searches 5. consent There are five theories for searching a vehicle without a warrant. Remember the safest way to search is with a warrant; however, automobile exception allows for searches without a warrant under these five circumstances

search of protected premises

There are only two circumstances that justify a warrantless search of protected premises - consent and exigent circumstances Protection extends to any location including businesses, where there exists a reasonable expectation of privacy Entry into protected premises such as home, apartments, hotel rooms etc. provides highest level of fourth amendment protections. These are places people have the highest expectation of privacy Business premises are also protected premises but police may enter businesses open to the public and other grounds of a business open to the public during business hours without a warrant. As long as the areas police enter are open to the public entry without warrant ok. Going into a back office of a store would require a warrant (not open to public)

touching for moving property in owners possession without depriving owner of possession

To constitute a meaningful interference with possession, police must deprive the owner of the possession, if only temporarily, such as by taking property away, detaining it, or preventing the suspect from retrieving it from a third party. Checking someone's name tag on a bag while they are holding it is not a search because no meaningful interference with possession.

abandoned property

Unequivocal act of relinquishing ownership: Thrown in garbage Thrown away while evading the police Denying ownership of an object when asked Duffel trouble example on p. 193 this is search of bag three

purpose of seizure

Use of the object as evidence -PC to associate the object w/a crime and either a SW describing it or a plain view discovery Detain the object for investigation -RS that the object is or contains criminal evidence or contraband Prevent the object from being moved while applying for a SW -PC to obtain a SW coupled w/the risk that the object will be moved unless the police seize it now Impound the property Legal authority to impound Use object as evidence requires PC as noted and a search warrant to recognized exception to the warrant requirement or plain view. Detain objects can only be for as long as needed to confirm or deny responsible suspicion. Prevent objects from being moved is part of exigent circumstances exception and can only be detained until a search warrant is obtained. Impounded property must be pursuant to published police department impound policy

inventory searches

Vehicle inventory search and inventory search at jail Purpose is to secure the owner's valuables and protect the police from liability Police must have legal authority to impound the vehicle or arrest suspect Police must follow standard procedures for inventorying Scope is governed by these procedures Intensity is limited to activity necessary to catalog and safeguard the items *may be done in conjunction with "automobile exception" search Legal authority to impound a vehicle must come from a written policy of the police department and the officers are acting consistent with that written policy. If not following the written policy the impound search violated fouth amendment. Policy must be in writing so public can check to see if the police were following it. Procedures for inventory must also be in written policy Everyone booked into a jail has personal property on them inventoried

seizure defined

When a police officer commits a meaningful interference with a person's possessory interest in property Question we need to ask is when do police meaningfully interfere with a person's possessory interest.

police investigations without invading privacy

anything visible to members of the public from a vantage point where the officer is lawfully present = open view

private-party searches

no 4th Amendment protection Not a search if duplicating activity that a private party has already performed

search

occurs when police intrude on a suspect's reasonable expectation of privacy either by: Physically trespassing into a constitutionally protected location, or Intruding into matters a suspect reasonably expects are private Using advanced surveillance technologies to spy on activities that citizens reasonably expect are private A search occurs when an officer physically intrudes on an area where a suspect has a reasonable expectation of privacy or uses advanced surveillance technology not available to the general public to spy on activities that a person reasonably expects to be private.

implied consent

statutory authority and administrative searches The 4th amendment warrantless inspections of business premises to determine compliance with government regulations Businesses can be searched to determine if they comply with government regulations. Example, search of kitchen at restaurant to see if it complies with health and safety regulations. XO Asian Cuisine shut down after search revealed unhealthy conditions in violation of state regulation. Businesses give implied consent to search by conducting businesses subject to regulation

actual consent

warrantless entry is justified when police recieve knowing, voluntary, and intelligent consent Concealment of police identity okay Can't misrepresent a valid warrant Consent must be by someone who has actual or apparent authority Limited boundaries