CJUS 410-001 Final Exam Review

What are the two prongs in the Aguilar-Spinelli Test?

(1) The affidavit must describe underlying circumstances from which a neutral and detached magistrate may determine that eh informant had a sufficient basis for his knowledge and that the information was not the result of a mere rumor. (2) The affidavit must describe underlying circumstances from which the magistrate may determine that the informant was credible or that the informant's information was reliable.

Sixth Amendment

A constitutional amendment designed to protect individuals accused of crimes. It includes the right to counsel, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to a speedy and public trial.

Fifth Amendment

A constitutional amendment designed to protect the rights of persons accused of crimes, including protection against double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and punishment without due process of law.

Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971):

A court case that held that a state attorney general-who, by his office, was also the state's chief investigator and was later to be the chief prosecutor at trial, was not a "neural and detached" judicial officer.

Reverse Lineups:

A defendant would be identified by coached witness as the perpetrator of a fictious crime, with the object of inducing him to confess to the actual crime of which he was suspected to escape the false prosecution.

Franks Hearing:

A hearing to determine whether a police officer's affidavit used to obtain a search warrant that yields incriminating evidence was based on false statements.

Aguilar-Spinelli Test

A judicial guideline set down by the U.S. Supreme Court for evaluating the validity of a search warrant or a warrantless arrest based on information provided by a confidential informant or an anonymous tip.

What is a "neutral and detached" judicial officer?

A judicial officer who is not necessarily involved with the activities of law enforcement, but still has the permitting authority to issue a warrant, based on probable cause and witness testimony. Such individuals can be judges, court clerks, and magistrates.

Franks v. Delaware (1978):

A law enforcement officer who intentionally or knowingly makes false statements in an application for a warrant clearly violates the affidavit requirement. But the rule on truthfulness is also violated if an officer swears to information with reckless disregard for the truth.

Custody:

A person in custody for purposes of Miranda v. Arizona when the person is deprived of freedom of action in any significant way.

Rule 41(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure:

A regulation that was added to establish a procedure for the issuance of a search warrant based upon any of the following: § The evidence of a crime, contraband or other items illegally possessed. § The property designed for use or intended use for committing a crime. § A person to be arrested or person who is unlawfully restrained.

Miranda Warnings:

A series of statements informing criminal suspects, on their arrest, of their constitutional rights, such as the right to remain silent and the right to counsel. It has been required since the Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966).

Express Waivers

A suspect says, writes, or otherwise acknowledges that he or she is aware of his or her Miranda rights and voluntarily elects to give up those rights with knowledge of the consequences.

Totality of Circumstances

A term the court uses to refer to all facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time, or reasonably perceived by the officer as the basis for, a use of force decision.

Miranda Rights:

A type of notification customarily given by police to criminal suspects in police custody advising them of their right to silence; that is, their right to refuse to answer questions or provide information to law enforcement or other officials.

Police detectives begin to interrogate a criminal suspect without having read the Miranda warnings. During this initial questioning, the suspect makes an incriminating statement. The detectives, after hearing the incriminating statement, make the suspect aware of his Miranda rights. Questioning continues and the suspect repeats the incriminating information. How are the courts most likely to view the statement?

A volunteered statement does not constitute interrogation - especially if it is not in response to questioning. If given during an interrogation, then those statements prior to the Miranda Requirements are not permissible in court. If Miranda is given and waived, (which hopefully happens on tape and in writing), then further statements are permissible.

General Warrant:

A warrant that fails to specify the person or place to be searched or the person or item to be seized and leaves the time and manner of the search to the discretion of the searching officer. Law enforcement abused these types of warrants, and soon no person or property was protected from unlimited search.

Affidavit:

A written declaration of statement of facts sworn before a judge or magistrate.

What are the critical stages of a criminal proceeding?

Arraignment, post indictment line-ups, post indictment interrogation, plea negotiations, and entering a plea of guilty.

Why are Miranda Warnings even employed?

As a safeguard to protect individuals from self-incrimination. This has given citizens much more awareness of their constitutional rights.

What are the most notable aspects about the Fifth Amendment?

Ensure that a person's will is not overborne by coercive police interrogation tactics. Deal with police only through counsel during interrogation. Consult with an attorney even if there is no arrest. Attaches prior to arrest. No Miranda? Information gathered not admissible in court.

It should be emphasized that Miranda warnings technically do not need to be given until custodial interrogation begins.

False

The suspect has a right to be informed of the charges against him at the time of arrest or during any custodial interrogation.

False

Police interrogate an inexperienced, young person with a mental disorder and obtain a confession. A court may never use this statement in any capacity

False - if they made sure the person understood rights

Police are not permitted to lie to suspects during interrogation.

False, but it can only be some forms of deception, such as verbal misrepresentations, are permitted, but cannot involve the manufacture of false evidence nor lies about the law and its processes.

In the case of Franks v. Delaware, the court determined that if a search warrant was issued based on some exaggeration by the applying officer of the factual basis for the warrant, the seized items must be suppressed as evidence.

False.

Sentencing Reform Act of 1984

Federal legislation that created the United States Sentencing Commission and empowered it to create a uniform set of federal sentencing guidelines to reduce sentencing disparities and realistically project the needs of the federal correctional system.

Probable Cause can be based on:

Flight - coupled with specific knowledge. Furtive action - must be coupled with specific. Knowledge - insufficient in isolation to justify arrest. Real/physical evidence. Admissions. False or implausible answers to routine questions. Presence at a crime scene or in a high crime area. Association with other known criminals. Past criminal conduct.

Can testimony be used if it involved a Miranda violation?

If a law officer receives an unsolicited admission, without first giving Miranda Rights, the suspect must be given his Miranda warning, must wave those Miranda rights, and should re-give that confession. It would be best if the waiving of the Miranda Rights and the Confession at this point were both in writing.

Why was the Fourth Amendment established?

In response to the abuses of governmental search and seizure authority originating in Britain in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It appears that search warrants were first used in cases involving stolen property. Eventually, the use of warrants was extended to law enforcement entirely.

Staleness:

Information on which probable cause was initially based is no longer valid because too much time has passed since the search warrant was issued, thus rendering the warrant void. It is an important factor in determining the validity of probable cause to search.

An officer is conducting an investigation and has become particularly suspicious of a certain person to the point of concentrating all the investigative methods and inquiries on proving that that suspect is the perpetrator. The officer is about to question the suspect (who does not realize she is suspected of the crime) in the suspect's home. For any statements to be admissible, _____.

It needs to be during daytime or normal hours (not 4am). The person cannot be handcuffed (restricted or restrained). The person needs to know they can end the discussion. The person cannot be isolated from other people or restricted to a part of the house.

Standard for secondhand informants/Hearsay Method (citizens or criminals):

Law Enforcement should apply for a search warrant based on information from informants. The officer should write down in the affidavit or complaint the basis for the search warrant. Even in warrantless searches, the officer should write down and record all the circumstances, tips, and testimony.

The right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment differs from the right counsel under Miranda, which flows from the Fifth Amendment, in what way?

Miranda exists to prevent compulsory self-incrimination only when a suspect is subject to custodial interrogation. The Sixth Amendment is more focused on protecting those facing the criminal adversarial proceedings in court.

A suspect has been formally charged with a crime (either through prosecutor information or grand jury indictment). The suspect has been assigned defense counsel. While in police custody, the suspect contacts police detectives requesting a meeting to discuss the charges and evidence. The police:

Must make the defendant aware of their right to counsel and right to remains silent and the defendant must knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waive those rights. Then the police can question the suspect until or unless the suspect clearly requests an attorney.

What is Probable Cause based off of?

Nature, Quality, and Amount of information (facts/circumstances).

Can a suspect obtain a lawyer by simply hinting that they might need, want, or are considering counsel?

No, an individual must activiely request an attorney.

Search and seizure generally. Is it always unreasonable?

No, sometimes search and seizure can be reasonable if it is based off of probable cause.

Can the police use psychological coercion during a custodial interrogation?

No, subtle forms of psychological pressure that may render confession involuntary.

Under Rule 41(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, seizure is limited to

Non-testimonial evidence.

Information to Establish Probable Cause may come to police in two ways:

Officer personally perceives or gathers the information using his own senses. Other individuals - victims, witnesses, reporters, informants, or other police agencies may perceive and gather information and provide it to the officer.

What can police officers do and what can they not do when faced with attorney requests?

Once there is a request for an attorney is made under the 5th amendment, the suspect cannot be questioned without his attorney present. When criminal procedures have begun, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is attached (not invoked), the defendant cannot be questioned without an attorney present.

Do Miranda Rights need to re-stated multiple times to a suspect? When would it be appropriate?

Only if: § A significant amount of time has passed. § There is an interruption in the continuity of the interrogation. § There is a change of location or venue. § There is a different police officer questioning the suspect. § There are significant differences between statements the suspect has made from the immediate time of arrest to later.

Incommunicado Interrogation:

Questioning a person cut off from the rest of the world in police-dominated atmosphere-resulting in self-incriminating statements without ever having been warned of constitutional rights. It is a violation of the Fifth Amendment.

Anonymous Tips:

Rarely survive a rigorous application of either prong. However, if supplemented by independent police investigation, can contribute to solving a crime. Their truthfulness is unknowable.

Can simply being silent invoke a Miranda right?

Silence does NOT invoke the right to remain silent. One must specifically say "I won't talk to you" and then actually not talk. Talking afterwards waives that right.

What is the most notable commonalities between the Fifth and Sixth Amendment?

Suspects can voluntarily waive both their 5th and 6th Amendment Rights. Interrogation must stop once a suspect has invoked their 5th or 6th amendment rights. The 5th Amendment must be invoked, while the 6th Amendment is attached at the onset of formal proceedings.

What do the Miranda rights focus on?

The Self-Incrimination Clause. It requires that suspects may not testify against themselves in any criminal proceedings and that suspects be warned of their right to have counsel present during questing.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

The court ruled that those subjected to in-custody interrogation be advised of their constitutional right to an attorney and their right to remain silent.

What's the government penalty for Miranda Violations?

The courts cannot use anything received before a suspect has received his or her Miranda Rights. Law enforcement cannot be sued for not giving Miranda Rights.

Probable Cause (Definition for Search):

The facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information is sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasons caution in the belief that the sizable property would be found in a particular place or on a particular person.

Affiant:

The individual searing out an affidavit for a search warrant.

Police attempt to interrogate a criminal suspect at the police station prior to any court appearance. The suspect states unequivocally that he wants an attorney present during the questioning. Given the scenario, select the true statement.

The police must stop the interrogation until an attorney is present.

Custodial Interrogation

The questioning of a suspect after that person has been taken into custody. In this situation, the suspect is told they cannot leave or is pressured not to leave. The individual must be read his or her Miranda rights before interrogation can begin.

Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Implied Waivers

The suspect does not invoke rights, but rather by using their words or actions show that they have waived or they initiated conversation.

Coached Lineups

The use of lineups in which a coached witness would pick the defendant as the perpetrator which would constitute the functional equivalent of interrogation.

Police are in the initial stages of investigating a suspect for involvement in a criminal offense. The suspect has not been indicted. Police arrange for a lineup, but don't provide counsel for the defendant. In the course of conducting the lineup, police followed certain procedures that were highly suggestive to the witness called upon to participate in the lineup. Given this scenario, _____.

This is a coached line-up. This would be the functional equivalent of an interrogation and the suspect must be Mirandized.

What are the most notable aspects about the Sixth Amendment?

Triggered once criminal proceedings begin. Protect the defendant's rights during the adversarial and critical stages of criminal prosecution. Police may question the suspect on unrelated matters outside the presence of their attorney.

After Miranda rights, the suspect does not require additional warnings.

True

Miranda is limited to only testimonial evidence.

True

Police can ask a suspect to provide some personal details, such as a name, address, handwriting, and fingerprints, as well as ask a suspect to participate in a lineup in compliance with the Fifth Amendment.

True

Police can document slurring of speech in response to questions, as well as muscular coordination in compliance with the Fifth Amendment.

True

Police do not have to tell the suspect everything that they know to help the suspect calibrate his self interest in deciding to speak.

True

Psychiatric examinations constitute interrogations for Miranda purposes because the responses to the questions asked of the defendant.

True

The Miranda decision dictates that statements obtained in violation of self-incrimination clause are not admissible even if they were otherwise made voluntarily.

True

The Miranda rulings mandates that law enforcement officers follow certain procedural safeguards that require the suspect be advised of his or her rights.

True

The Miranda safeguards require that prior to custodial interrogation, Police Officers must inform the suspect of his rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during questioning.

True

The Supreme Court affirmed that Miranda and cases in its progeny "govern the admissibility of statements made during custodial interrogation in both state and federal court systems."

True

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a minor's age properly informs Miranda's custody analysis under the totality of the circumstances because children's ability to withstand coercion markedly differs from those of adults.

True

Under the guidelines of Miranda, Law Enforcement must consider the suspect's age, intelligence, competency, education, familiarity with justice system, drug/alcohol impairment, mental health, language.

True

Unless the prosecution can demonstrate compliance with Miranda safeguards, the courts will not accept any statements from the suspect.

True

Warrants must describe with particularity "the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized" and avoid "general, exploratory rummaging in a person's belongings."

True

When an individual is taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his or her freedom by the authorities in any significant way and is subjected to questioning, the privilege against self-incrimination is jeopardized.

True

Illinois v. Gates (1983)

U.S. Supreme Court decision that replaced the Aguilar-Spinelli test with the "totality of the circumstances" test in order to determine the existence of the probable cause needed for obtaining a search warrant.

What is generally considered credible during a crime scene?

Victims and eye-witnesses

What is the legal standard of Probable Cause?

Warrantless police actions are usually held to be unreasonable unless based on probable cause and are more stringent than those for warrants because the government prefers warrants.

Once in custody, must the police inform the suspect of their Miranda rights?

Yes, and it can be done at the time of arrest and they are good for 2.5 hours following. There needs to re-do Miranda rights if a lot of time has passed or a new person interrogates.

Once Miranda Right to silence has been invoked, must the interrogation stop?

Yes, unless the suspect re-initiates conversation.

A law enforcement officer applying for a search warrant must supply the magistrate with the grounds for issuance of the warrant. This is usually accomplished by means of

an affidavit and an affiant.

Probable cause must be based on

facts.

The Supreme Court and a federal appellate court have held that the following persons were not sufficiently "neutral and attached" to issue warrants in spite of the fact they held magistrate positions:

§ An nonsalaried magistrate who received a fee each time he or she issues a search warrant but received nothing for denying a warrant application. § A magistrate who also worked as a deputy jailer at a county jailer who "stood to gain financially" when booking and arrests were processed through his or her jail. § A magistrate who merely acted as a "rubber stamp" by signing a warrant without reading it or any of the supporting documentation submitted with it.

A Search Warrant is:

§ An order of writing. § Issued by the proper judicial authority. § In the name of the people. § Directed to a law enforcement officer. § Commanding the officer to search for certain personal property. § Commanding the officer to bring that property before the judicial authority named in the warrant.

Elements of Probable Cause:

§ Collective knowledge of the police at the time of arrest or search. § If the officer acts in good faith with the collective knowledge. § Officers should write a report outlining probable cause.

What are some important aspects regarding the use of Confidential Informants?

§ Credibility must be established by underlying facts/circumstances. § Informant admitted/turned over evidence against themselves. § Informant's information was corroborated. § Identity does not have to be disclosed. § Statements by informants harder to challenge that even those of the police officer.

These cases suggest the following guidelines for conducting a second custodial interrogation of a person who has exercised the Miranda right to remain silent:

§ Honor the individual's right to terminate questioning at the initial interrogation. § Allow a significant amount of time to intervene. between the first and second interrogation attempts. § Give the person complete Miranda warnings again. § Do not employ any pressure to cooperate or other psychological ploys or tactics.

Every Miranda Warning:

§ Must be given to all suspects. § Must apply regardless of the nature or severity of the offense being investigated. § Must be completed before custodial interrogations. § Is inapplicable to civil proceedings. § Does not be given in exact form, as long as they are reasonably conveyed.

What psychological techniques can police officers conduct when placing a suspect in a custodial interrogation?

§ Promise Leniency. § Encouragement to Cooperate. § Promise of Psychiatric or Medical care. § Appeal to religious beliefs - including praying with suspect.

Practices that do not violate Due Process voluntariness:

§ Promises of leniency. § Encouragement to cooperate. § Promises of psychological. § Appeal to religious beliefs.

These psychological ploys are considered to be functional equivalent of interrogation:

§ Seeking a Suspect's "Cooperation" § Making Pleas or Directives to the Conscience. § Implying blame. § Confronting the suspect with evidence. § Confronting suspect with an accomplice. § Directly responding to questions. § Allowing a suspect to talk with friends or family. § Placing suspects in the same location with other suspects. § "Invitations" or commands to talk.

The affidavit supporting a request for a search warrant for a place must contain a particular description that points directly to an ascertainable place to the exclusion of all others. This includes:

§ Specific address. § Information on multiple-occupancy dwellings. § Type of motor vehicle. § Domestic mail. § E-mail description.

What conditions need to present to trigger Miranda warnings?

§ Suspect has been charged § Prime Suspect- Focus of the investigation § Suspect is in police custody

An affidavit for a search warrant should inform a judge or magistrate of three things:

§ That a criminal offense has been or is being committed. § That sizeable evidence relating to that offense is in a particular place at a particular time. § The method(s) law enforcement officers will use to identify the appropriate premises or persons.

What is the two-step process in a Franks Hearing?

§ The defendant bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that an application for a warrant contained false statements. § The remaining information contained in the affidavit after the offending data is set aside fails to establish probable cause.

The circumstances that are typically evaluated when trying to determine whether a suspect has been in custody include the following criteria:

§ The degree of restraint or force used to physically detain the suspect. § The location of the encounter. § The number officers at the scene. § The duration and character of the interrogation. § The language used to summon the suspect. § The extent to which the suspect is confronted with evidence of guilt. § Whether the suspect initiated contact with the police.

Totality of Circumstances is based on which Four Factors?

§ The nature of the information. § Police review of matter reported. § The basis for the informant's knowledge. § Corroboration through investigation.

What are Non-Custody situations in law enforcement?

§ Traffic stops, § Business hours in a public place § Access to other people § Probation interviews § A person detained during a search warrant § The suspect initiates the interview § Police discuss the case in front of the defendant without asking questions

Integration does not include:

§ Volunteered questions. § Clarifying questions. § Routine questions. § Spontaneous questions. § Inquiries by undercover agents

The knowledge of these facts and circumstances can come both from the affiant officer's own senses and from what the affiant officer learned from other police officers, informants, and witnesses who had personal knowledge based on what they perceived using their own senses. This typically includes one or more of the following:

§ What was viewed at the crime scene? § What was learned from interviewing victims and witnesses? § What was learned from credible or reliable informants? § What was learned from the observation and evaluation of real or physical evidence? § What officers learned from observing or talking with a suspect?