CJ
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Chapter 7Chapter 7
Police and the Police and the Constitution: Constitution:
The Rules of Law The Rules of Law EnforcementEnforcement
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcomes
LO1:Outline the four major sources that may provide probable causes.
LO2:Distinguish between a stop and a frisk, and indicate the importance of the case Terry v. Ohio.
LO3:List the four elements that must be present for an arrest to take place.
LO4:Explain when searches can be made without a warrant.
LO5:Indicate situations in which a Miranda warning is unnecessary.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 1
The Fourth Amendment contains two critical legal concepts:
• Unreasonable searches and seizures
• The requirement of probable cause to issue a warrant
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 1Reasonableness
• No specific meaning for “reasonableness” exists.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 1Sources of Probable Cause:• Personal observation• Information• Evidence • Association
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 1
The Probable Cause Framework
• Probable cause provides a framework that limits the situations in which police offices can make arrests.
• Once an arrest is made, the arresting officer must prove to a judge that probable cause existed.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 1
The Exclusionary Rule:• Prohibits the use of illegally obtained
evidence
The Fruit of the Poisoned Tree:• Evidence obtained through illegally
obtained evidence is also inadmissible
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 2• Terry v. Ohio (1968)
– Sets precedent for reasonable suspicion in stop-and-frisk situations.
• The “totality of the circumstances”
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 2
A stop is the brief detention of a person by the police for questioning. A stop requires reasonable suspicion.
A frisk is a pat-down or minimal search by police to discover weapons. It is conducted for the protection of the officer.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 2
The elements of arrest: • The intent to arrest• The authority to arrest• Seizure or detention• The understanding of a person that
they have been arrested
© 2011 Cengage Learning
CAREERPREPAnimal Control Officer
Job Description:Work to protect stray, injured, abused, and unwanted animals.
This includes rescuing the animals, aiding in the prosecution of individuals who abused them, and providing impounded animals with humane care.
Educate the public about overpopulation and responsible pet ownership.
What Kind of Training Is Required ?On-the-job training is a common condition for entry-level
positions in this field.Desirable backgrounds include an associates degree or study in
law enforcement, criminology, animal behavior, and/or veterinary technology.
Annual Salary Range?$13,236–$44,149
For additional information, visit: www.nacanet.org.
3LO
© 2011 Cengage Learning
List the four elements that must be present for an arrest to take place.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
Arrests with a warrant:• Officers are required to knock,
announce their identity and their purpose. – Wilson v. Arkansas (1967)– Hudson v. Michigan (2006)
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
Arrests with a warrant:• Under certain exigent circumstances
officers do not need to announce themselves:– The suspect is armed and poses a threat of
violence. – Evidence is being destroyed.– A felony is in progress.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
Arrests with a warrant:• The Waiting Period - Hudson v.
Michigan (2006)– Police are required to wait a
reasonable amount of time after knocking and announcing.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
Arrests without a warrant: The arrest is committed in the presence
of the officer. The officer has knowledge a crime was
committed and probable cause to believe the crime was committed by a particular person.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
The role of privacy in searches:• Search
– A governmental intrusion on a citizen’s reasonable expectation of privacy.
• Katz v. United States (1967)– Established “reasonable
expectation of privacy.”
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3The role of privacy in searches:• Two-pronged test for person’s
expectations of privacy:– The individual must prove that he or
she expected privacy. – Society must recognize that
expectation as reasonable.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
A Legitimate Privacy Interest• California v. Greenwood (1988)
– Suspect does not have expectation of privacy when it comes to garbage bags.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
Search warrants must demonstrate:– Information showing probable cause
that a crime has been or will be committed.
– Specific information on the premises to be searched, the suspects to be found and the illegal activities taking place at those premises, and the items to be seized.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 3
Four categories of items that can be seized by use of a search warrant:– Items resulting from the crime, such as
stolen goods– Items that are inherently illegal for
anyone to possess– Items that can be called “evidence” of
the crime– Items used in committing the crime
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4
• Searches incidental to arrest – United States v. Robinson (1973)
• The need for a police office to find and confiscate any weapons a suspect may be carrying.
• The need to protect any evidence on the suspect’s person from being destroyed.
– Chimel v. California (1969)• Sets limits on warrantless searches made during an
arrest.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4Searches with consent• Factors for considering whether consent
is voluntary:– The age, intelligence, and physical
condition of the consenting suspects. – Any coercive behavior by the police,
such as the language used to request consent.
– The length of the questioning and its location.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4• Searches of automobiles
– Carroll v. United States (1925)• Law distinguishes among automobiles, homes,
and persons in questions involving police searches.
– According to Supreme Court, police do not need warrant to search automobiles or other movable vehicles.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4• Searches of automobiles
– Whren v. United States (1996)• “True” motivation of officers in making traffic
stops is irrelevant if they had probable cause.
– Maryland v. Wilson (1997)• Officers can order drivers and passengers out
of a car during a traffic stop.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4• Containers within a vehicle
– Supreme court has given police lots of leeway for warrantless searches of containers within a vehicle.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4
• Plain view doctrine– Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971)
• The item is positioned in the officer’s view• The officer is legally in a position to notice
the item• The discovery of the item is inadvertent• The officer immediately recognizes the
illegal nature of the item
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4Electronic surveillance can only
be used:• If consent is given by one of
the parties• Or there is a warrant
authorizing the activity
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4For a warrant for electronic
surveillance to be valid, it must:– Detail with particularity the
conversations that are to be overheard
– Name the suspects and the places that will be under surveillance
– Show with probable cause that a specific crime has been or will be committed
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 4Video and Digital Surveillance• Closed-circuit television cameras
(CCTV)• Criticisms - Easily abused to invade
privacy
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 5
You have the right to remain silent. If you give up that right, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
You have the right to speak with an attorney and to have the attorney present during
questioning. If you so desire and cannot afford one, an attorney will be appointed for
you without charge before questioning.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 5
The legal basis for Miranda:– The Fifth Amendment protection
against self-incrimination.– Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
• Inherent coercion – even if a police office does not lay a hand on the suspect, the general atmosphere of an interrogation is coercive.
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 5Miranda warning is required:• When a suspect is under custody
• Custodial interrogation:– When a suspect is under arrest or
deprived of freedom in a significant manner
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 5Miranda is not required:• When police do not ask suspect
questions that are testimonial in nature
• When the police have not focused on a suspect and are questioning witnesses at the scene
• When a person volunteers information before being asked
© 2011 Cengage Learning
Learning Outcome 5
Miranda is not required:• When the suspect has given a
private statement to a friend or acquaintance
• During a stop and frisk when no arrest has been made
• During a traffic stop