CRIMINALPROCEDUREI(INVESTIGATION)OUTLINE

QuestionstoAsk:
Whoistheaccused?Whathappenedtohimorher/Whatwasthe
sentencethattheyreceived?Whatistheholdingandtheimpactonoureverydaylives?
OnlyhavetoreadSupremeCourtcases.Skimeverythingelse.
Coursefocusesonactivityofthepolice.
Midterm
Shouldthecourtsuppresstheevidence?Arguebothprosecutoranddefense
counsel.(Argueevenifforexample,bringupupgoodfaithfortheprosecutorevenifit
isnttheapplicabletest.)

FourMainPoints
1. Standing
personbringingclaimmustbeaggrieved.
2. StateAction
Aggrievancemustbefromthestate
3. Remedies
Remedyforconstitutionalviolation(CruxoftheproblemofCrimPro
Criminalscangetoffbecauseoftechnicality
Example:
Suppression)
4. Whetherthepoliceactedconstitutionallyandwhetheritwasdeterminedina
PreTrialHearing

PROBABLECAUSE

UnitedStatesv.Draper
Facts:
TwoenvelopesofHeroinfoundonDraperbasedoninformationofinformant
Issue:
Wasthereprobablecause?
Rule:
Probablecauseexistswherethefactsandcircumstanceswithinthearresting
officersknowledgeandofwhichtheyhadreasonablytrustworthyinformationare
sufficientinthemselvestoawarrantamanofreasonablecautioninthebeliefthatan
offensehasbeenorisbeingcommitted.(Reasonableofficerstandard).
JusticeDouglasDissent:

1)CrimProisdiscussedincasesonlywheretherewas
evidence2)Sometimesguiltygofreetoenforce4thAmendment3)Whatisrecoveredis
irrelevanttoProbableCausePaidinformantdoesnotamounttoreliable/reasonable
information.

Aguilarv.Texas
Facts:
Houstonpoliceofficersappliedforasearchwarranttolookfornarcoticsinthe
homeofNickAlfordAguilar.Insupportoftheirsearchwarrantapplication,officers
submittedaffidavitsexplainingthattheyhadreceivedinformationfromaconfidential
informant,notnamedintheapplication,whichtheybelievedtobereliable.Forcingtheir
wayinside,officersfoundAguilarattemptingtodisposeofnarcotics.Aguilarwas
arrestedandindictedfordrugpossessionbytheStateofTexas.
Issue:
WasthereProbableCauseforthejudgetoissuethewarrant?
Rule:
Inanaffidavit,lawenforcementmustshowthataninformanthasa
basisof
knowledge
and
reliability
1


Floridav.Harris
Rule:
Certificationofnarcoticsdogisenoughtoestablishadogasareliablebasisfor
probablecause

Illinoisv.Gates
Facts:
Thepolicereceivedananonymousletteroutliningspecificdetailsaboutthe
Defendants,Gatesandothers(thedefendants),planstotrafficdrugsfromFloridato
Illinois.Whenthedetailswerecorroboratedbythedefendantsactions,policeobtaineda
searchwarrantandfounddrugs,weaponsandothercontrabandinthedefendants
homeandautomobile.
Issue:
Areanonymoustipsreliableinformation
Rule:Spinelli/Aguilarnolongerdispositive.Reducedtofactors:Basisof
KnowledgeandReliability
TotalityofCircumstancesTest:
Whethertherewasa
fairprobability
basedon
thetotalityofthecircumstancesthattherewasprobablecause.(Appellate
DeterminationWhetherthereisafairbasisfordeterminingthattherewas
probablecausebasedonthetotalityofthecircumstances)(
Trigger>Copgoes
togetwarrantandactsonthatwarrant)

Commonwealthv.Dunlap
Facts:
Inthiscase,atrainedpoliceofficer,workinginwhattheofficertermeda
highcrimeneighborhood,observedAppellantandanotherindividualexchangecurrency
foranunknownobjectwithoutseeinganyothersuspiciousactivity.Shortlythereafter,
Appellantwasarrestedandsearchedwithoutawarrant.Asitturnedout,Appellantwas
inphysicalpossessionofcrackcocaine.Hewasthereafterchargedwithvarious
narcoticsrelatedoffenses.
Issue:
Wasthereprobablecause
Rule:
Noprobablecause.
FactorstobeconsideredforTotalityofCircumstances:
Thetimeisimportant
thestreetlocationisimportant
theuseofastreetfor
commercialtransactionsisimportant
thenumberofsuchtransactionsisimportant

theplacewheresmallitemswerekeptbyoneofthesellersisimportant
the
movementsandmannersofthepartiesareimportant.(Typicallycourtswanttoseemore
thanonetransactionunlessthetimeisearlyinthemorning).
Courtstatesthatthere
mustbenexusbetweenPoliceOfficerstrainingandexperienceandhisactions.
Meresuspiciondoesnotgiverisetoprobablecause.Commercialtransactions
betweencitizensonastreetdoesnotgiverisetoprobablecause.

EXCLUSIONARYRULE/SUPPRESSION
Statedgoalistodeterthepolicefromviolating4thAmendmentbecausepolicewillknow
evidencewillbesuppressed.Judiciallycreatedremedy(corollarytothe4thAmendmentitsa
privilegegrantedatthecourtsdiscretion).Onlyaremedyifcontrabandisdiscoveredonyour
person.
2


Mappv.Ohio
Facts:
Copsforcetheirwayintowomanshomeafterreceivinginformationthataperson
washidingoutthere.Policediscoverobscenematerials
Issue:
Whethertoapplytheexclusionaryruletothestates?
Rule:
ExclusionaryRuleshouldapplyagainstthestatesbecauseof1)JudicialIntegrity
and2)Deterrence

UnitedStatesv.Leon
Facts:
Judgegrantsawarrantbasedonunreliableinformants.Policethenbehave
reasonablyinrelianceonwarrant.
Issue:
Whethertheexclusionaryruleshouldbeusedwhenanofficerreasonablyrelies
onaneutralmagistrateswarrantthatturnsouttobeunsupportedbyprobablecause.
Rule:

GoodFaithExceptiontotheExclusionaryRule
Iftheofficeractsingoodfaith
thereisnothingtodeter.Theevidenceisnotsuppressed.
Evidenceisonly
suppressedwhenitfurthersthepolicyoftheexclusionaryrule:deterrence
(FactualTrigger>Judgeissuesawarrantandcopreliesonitandthereisno
probablecauseforwarrant)
Threecircumstanceswheregoodfaithdoesnotapply
Officerknowinglyorrecklesslyawareoffalsehoodsintheapplication
Judgewasarubberstampforpolicewarrant
Officermusthavea
substantialbasis
fordeterminingthatthereis
probablecause

***UltimateQuestion:Wastheofficersactionsobjectivelyreasonable?***
UnderminesTotalityofCircumstancesTest
Brennan&Marshall:Inconceivablethat
anofficerwouldfindthattherewasnosubstantialbasisforawarrant.Nowthereis
reasonablerelianceonanunreasonablewarrant.

UnitedStatesv.Hudson
Rule:
CostbenefitAnalysis
Ifpoliceofficersactionsisnottooegregiousthenthere
ThreedisqualifiersofGoodFaithExceptionthereforehavenomerit.

Herringv.UnitedStates
Facts:
Officerbelievedthattherewasoutstandingarrestwarrantbutthebeliefturned
outtobewrongbecauseofnegligentbookkeepingbyanotherpoliceemployee.
Holding:CostBenefitAnalysisisusedtodeterminewhentousetheExclusionary
Rule:
Thebenefitsofdeterrencemustoutweighthecosts.ExclusionaryRuleonly
applieswhenthereisdeliberate,reckless,orgrossnegligence.
Biggererrorwasthat
thebookkeepingwasnotattenuated.
(Responsetothosewhothoughtthat
ExclusionaryRulewastoobroad)(
Trigger>Cop1isrelyingoninformationfrom
another)
3

Davis(CommentingonHerring)
ApplicabilityofGoodfaithexceptiondependson:
flagrancyoftheerrorwastheregrossnegligence?wasit
deliberate?(Isolatednegligencebytheofficerisnotflagrant)
whethersimilarerrorswillbedeterredinthefuture
whetherthedeterrencevalueoutweighsthesocialcost

UnitedStatesv.JohnPerryRyan
Facts:
Warrantultimatelysignedandhandedovercontainednodescriptionoftheitems
tobeseized.Onlytheaddressedwasseized.Agentsgoestoexecutewarrant.Agent
knowswhattolookfor.Recoversphotosanddocuments.Atsuppressionhearing,
defenseattorneycite4thAmendmentviolation.Prosecutorasksjudgetoreconsiderin
lightofHerring.
Rule:
DistinguishedfromHerring.Here,officersreliedonafaciallyinvalidwarrant.
Suppressionisnecessary.FirstcasewhereHerringisappliedtoaLeontypescenario

UnitedStatesv.Patton
Facts:
Searchwarrantapplicationcontainednoinformationregardingthereliabilityof
thewitness.Noprobablecause.Defensecounselarguesthatthereisnogoodfaith
becauseaffidavitforwarrantislacking.
Ruling:
Officerhadgoodfaithbecausehehadknow

WHATISASEARCH?
Searchisthethresholdissue.Youmustfirstestablishiftherewasasearch.Whatdidtheofficer
knowandwhatdidtheofficerdo?Themomentthesearchoccurredisimportant.Youmust
establishedthatyouwereillegallysearchedorseizedtoobtainaremedy.Remembernosuch
thingasprobablecausetosearch.Remember:Searcheswithoutawarrantarepresumptively
unreasonable.Theremustbeanexceptiontohaveasearchwithoutawarrant.

Goldmanv.UnitedStates
Facts:
Detectaphoneheldupagainstawalltohearaconversation.
Rule:
TrespassDoctrineAsearchrequiresaphysicaltrespass.

UnitedStatesv.Olmstead
Wiretappingnotatrespassbecauseaphoneconvoisintangible

Silvermanv.UnitedStates
Penetrationintothewallamountedtoatrespass

Katzv.UnitedStates
Facts:
FBIputarecordingdeviceonoutsideoftelephonebooth.Theydosowithouta
warrantbecausetheybelievedthatitwasn'tasearch.
Issue:
Cantherebeasearchwithoutphysicaltrespass?
4

Rule:Physicaltrespassnolongernecessary
foratrespass

becauseofmodern
technology.Searchesconductedoutsidethejudicialprocessareperseunreasonable
underthe4thAmendmentunlessthereisaspecificallyestablishedandwelldelineated
exception.
HarlansTwoProngedtest:ReasonableExpectationofPrivacy
Individualmusthaveindicatedanactualsubjectiveexpectationofprivacy(Subj)
Thatexpectationisonethatsocietyasawholeisrecognizeasreasonable(obj)
Siteornatureofpropertyinspected(Homeismoresacredthananopen
field)
Extenttowhichtheindividualhastakenstepstokeepsomethingprivate
Degreeofpoliceintrusion

Oliverv.UnitedStates
Facts:
Policeignorenotrespassingsignandalockedgate
Rule:
Individualhasnolegitimateexpectationthatopenfieldswillremainfreefrom
warrantlessintrusionfromgovernment
Curtilagelandimmediatelysurroundingthehome
Proximityofthelandtothehome
Whethertheareaisincludedwithinenclosuressurroundingthehouse
Natureoftheusetowhcihtheareaisput
Stepstakenbytheresidenttoprotectthelandfromobservation

Californiav.Ciraolo(AerialObservation)
Defendantknowinglyexposedhishometoaerial
Evenlookingatthecurtilagefromaerialobservationisnotasearch

Californiav.Greenwood(Garbage)
Respondentsexposedtheirgarbagetothepublicanddiminishedtheirexpectationof
privacy.

Kyllov.UnitedStates(ThermalImaginingDevices)
Facts:
ThermalImagingdeviceaimedataprivatehomefromapublicstreettodetect
relativeamountsofheat.
Rule:
Policeusageofathermalimagingdeviceisasearchbecausethermalimaging
devicesarenotofgeneralpublicuse.Youshouldntbeabletousetechnologyfor
somethingyoucouldnthavedonewithoutphysicalintrusion

UnitedStatesv.Jones(GPSDevices)
Facts:
GPSdeviceplantedoncarbylawenforcementtotrackmovements.Law
enforcementtrackshim.Defendantsaysyouneedawarrant.Governmentsaysitsnota
searchbecausethereisnoreasonableexpectationofprivacybecausepolicecanfollow
driveronpublicstreets.
5

Rule:
Courtholdsthisisasearch.
Scalia
Emphasizesphysicaltrespass.Reasonable
expectationdidnotreplacephysicaltrespass.Itsupplementedit.Believes4th
Amendmentdealtwithphysicalintrusionwhenitwasadopted.
Majority
Reasonable
ExpectationofPrivacy.
Sotomayor
Thereisanexpectationofprivacywhenpolice
followyouforanextendedperiodoftime
Leavesoptionopenforthepolicetotrackphonegpsandcarblackboxes
Havetolookattime,howlongthesearchwas,andthedeviceused

Davisv.UnitedStates
Issue:
Whathappenswhenthegpsdevicewasaffixeditwaspermitted.
Rule:GoodFaithinCaselawException:
CourtexpandGoodFaith.Objectivereliance
onbindingappellatedecisionsarenotsubjecttotheexclusionaryrule.

4thAandECPA:ElectronicCommunicationsPrivacyAct(includesthePatriotAct)governthe
debatetoday.
Governmentneedsasubpoenatogetinfo

UnitedStatesv.Forrester(9thCircuit)
Facts:
Lawenforcementmonitormanbecausetheybelievethattherewasalarge
ecstasyring.Theyobtainedpermission.Theyinstallamirrorportandobtaininformation
includingipaddresses.
Holding:
Nosearchbecausenoexpectationofprivacywhenyouvolunteerinformation
tothirdparties.Emailtoandfromwiththehelpofathirdpartyproviderabandonsa
reasonableexpectationofprivacy.

UnitedStatesv.Rorschach
Facts:
Guychargedwiththefraudulentsaleofsupplements.Governmentobtained
throughsubpoena27kofthemansemailswithouthispermission.Subpoenawaslegal
becauseofECPA.
Holding:
Individualhadareasonableexpectationofprivacyinhisemail.Courtthen
goestothegoodfaithexceptionandallowstheevidencebecausegovernment
objectivelyrelied.

ACLUv.Klapper
Facts:
ConstitutionalandstatutoryclaimsbroughtagainstNSA.LawsuitafterSnowden
revealedthatNSAgotmetadatafromVerizononadailybasis.Centersaround4thAand
PatriotAct.Theyhavebeendoingsosince2006.
Holding:
Youdonothaveanexpectationofprivacybecauseyouregoingthroughotherpeople

Klaymanv.Obama
NSAPrograminfringesonexpectationofprivacy.

Floridav.Jardines
6

Facts:
Lawenforcementwerewalkingdogsuptopeopleshomes.
Issue:
Didthatamounttoasearch?
Holding:Scalia
Suchanactionamountedtoatrespass.Emphasisonthesanctityof
thehome.

SEARCHINCIDENTTOLAWFULARREST
Policecanarrestwithoutawarrantaslongasthereisprobablecause.Theycanconduct
searchesincidenttothatlawfularrest.Remember:
Searcheswithoutawarrantare
presumptivelyunreasonable.
Theremustbeanexceptiontohaveasearchwithouta
warrant/rationale.
Underlyingpoliciesare
officersafety
and
preservingevidencethatmightbedestroyedor
discarded.

SearchIncidenttoLawfulArrestRequirements
Underlyingarrestmustbelawfulandvalid
Thesearchmustbeincidentaltothearrest(Temporally&Spatially)

SearchIncidenttoLawfulArrestContours
Policecansearchthearresteesperson(plusitemsimmediatelyassociated)(Robinson)
Searchflowsnaturally
fromthearrestitself.Brightline.
Policecansearchareawithinarresteesimmediatecontrol(Alwaysbeendicey)(Chimel)
Contextbasedanalysis.Nobrightline.
Inahomearrestpolicecansearchspacesimmediatelyadjoinsfromwhichattackcould
belaunched.(Policy:Officersafety)(Marylandv.Buie)
Searchflowsnaturally
fromthearrestitself.Brightline.
Ifofficercanpointtoparticularfactswhereareasonablepersonwouldbelieve
therewasalurker,theycanperformafullprotectivesweepofthepremises.

Rochain
Facts:
Policeentershomeandpersonswallowsevidence.Policegrabhimandtryto
removeitfromhismouth.Theythenbringhimtothehospitalandforcehimtovomitout
evidence.
Holding:
Activitycantshocktheconscience.ViolatesDueProcess.

Schmerberv.California
Holding:
Courtokaywithpolicetakingbloodfromadefendantaslongasitisdonebya
doctor.
4Factorstoconsider:
Theremustbeclearevidencethattheevidencethatyouresearchingfor
willbe
foundinthebody
Theremustbeexigentcircumstances(Notimetogetawarrant)
7

Thechosentestmustbereasonable,likelytoextractwithoutrisk,trauma,
orpain
Mustbeconductedinareasonablemanner(accordingtoaccepted
medicalpractices)

Chimelv.California
Facts:
Policeconductsearchonthebasisofanarrestwarranteventhoughtheydidnot
haveawarranttosearch
Issue:
Whetherthewarrantlesssearchofapersonshousecanbeconstitutionally
justifiedasanincidenttothatarrest.
Holding:
Policecannotsearchtheentirehouse.Whenalawfulvalidarrestismade,
policemaysearchthepersonandthegrabbable
areawithinhisimmediatecontrol.
Casebycasedetermination.Nobrightlinerule
White&Black
Issueshouldbewhetherthesearchoftheotherhouseswere
reasonable

Marylandv.Buie
Inahomearrestpolicecansearchspacesimmediatelyadjoinsfromwhichattackcould
belaunched.(Policy:Officersafety)(Marylandv.Buie)
Searchflowsnaturally
fromthearrestitself.Brightline.
Ifanofficercanpointtoparticularfactswhereareasonablepersonwouldbelieve
therewasalurker,theycanperformafullprotectivesweepofthepremises.

UnitedStatesv.Robinson
Facts:
Trafficarrest.Improperdriverspaperwork.Officerconductssearchincidentto
thatarrest.Hefindscigarettepackwithcapsuleswhichlaterturnsoutotbeheroin.
Issue:
Whetherthepolicemaysearchanarresteeincidenttoatrafficarrestevenifthey
havenoreasontobelievetheyareindangerorifnoevidencewouldbedestroyed
Holding:
Courtsnolongerhavetoengageincasebycaseanalysis.Ineverylawful
custodialrelationship,policecanconductasearch.
BrightLineRule.
Brennan,Marshall,DouglasConsent:
Decisionraisespotentialforpoliceabusebecausethediscretiontheofficers
havewhethertoarrest.Underminesthepresumptionthattheremustbea
warrantforasearch.

Statev.Smith(SupremeCourtofOhio)
Facts:
Policerecovercellphoneandgothroughemails.
Holding:
Cellphoneisanitemimmediatelyassociatedwiththepersonatthetimeofthe
arrest.

Peoplev.Diaz(CaliforniaSupremeCourt)
Facts:
Officersarrestmanandsearchestextmessagesoncellphone.
Issue:
Wasthisasearchincidenttolawarrest
8

Holding:
Whethertheitemseizedwaspersonalpropertythatimmediatelyassociated
withhisperson.(SimilartoRobinson)

Knowlesv.Iowa
Facts:
PoliceofficerstoppedKnowlesandgavehimacitation.Officerthenconductsa
fullsearch.
Holding:
Youcanonlysearchincidenttoanarrest.Notacitation/ticket.(Critcism:might
leadtomorearrests)

Whrenv.UnitedStates
Facts:
Individualstoppedonthebasisofracialprofiling
Holding:
Subjectmotivationoflawenforcementisirrelevantaslongasthereisan
objectivebasisforthestop.

NewYorkv.Belton
Facts:
Officerarrestseveryoneincarandseparatesthemfromeachandgoesbackto
thecar.
Holding:
Policeofficersmay,contemporaneoustothepassenger,maysearch
compartmentstherein.Cannotsearchtrunk.(AdoptsRobinson)

Thorntonv.UnitedStates
Facts:
Policearrestmanandputhiminpolicecar.Policethensearchhiscar.
Holding:
Beltonruleapplieswhetherthearresteeisinthecarorstepsoutofthecar.

Arizonav.Gant
Facts:
Gantarrestedfordrivingwithasuspendedlicense,handcuffed,andlockedinthe
backofapatrolcar.Theythereaftersearchhiscarandfinddrugs.
Holding:
Avehiclesearchafterarecentoccupanthasbeensecuredremovedfromthe
sceneisnotauthorized.Searchincidenttolawfularrestnolongerappliestocarcases.
However
,searchispermissibleifofficerhasreasontobelievethatevidenceofthe
offenseofarrestmightbefoundinthevehicle.(
Dealswithtrafficstopfactpatterns)
Criticism
onlyprotectspeoplewithminortrafficinfractions.Copscanhave
reasontobelieveinallarrestsconcerningdrugsetc.
Innonvehiclecases,doesthisholdingapply?

Statev.Manuel
Facts:
Defendantarrestedpursuanttoanarrestwarrant.PDliftupboxspringof
mattress.Governtarguesthereavalidsearchincidenttoarrest.Defendantarguesthat
Holding:
Gantholdingdoesnotextendto
Buie

STOP&FRISK

Terryv,Ohio
Facts:
ArrestingOfficerDetectiveMcFadden(39yearsonthejob)observedfrom300
feetawayin2:30intheafternoonthatindividualswerecasingastickup.Basedonhis
experience,hewalksovertothe3andaskedtheirnames.Theymumbledaresponse.
HespinsTerry
Issue:
Isitalwaysperseunreasonableifapoliceofficerdoesasearchwithoutprobable
cause?Isthereanythingacopcandoiftheydonthaveprobablecausebutsuspectis
doingsomethingiswrong?
Defenseargument:
4thAmendmentsstatesthatyoucantsearchandseizewithout
probablecause
Prosecutionargument:
4thAmendmentonlyprotectsyouinsituationsofseizures.
Holding:
Defendantswerestoppedbutnotseized.Theywerefriskedbutnotsearched.
Onlyneed
reasonablesuspicion
tostopandfrisk.
Courtrecognizestheneedforpolice
toengageinseizuresthatareshortofarrests.Courtalsorecognizestheneedforpolice
tofriskiftheyhaveagoodfaithbasis.
ReasonableSuspicion
isdeterminedbythetotalityofthecircumstances
Whenconductingapatdown,policemustbelievethattheycomeintocontact
withaguntoconductasearch.
ReasonableSuspicionStop&FriskProbableCauseArrestSearch
IncidenttothatArrest
HarlanConcurrenceT
herighttowalkaway.Mereactofwalkingawaycannotserve
asareasonforanofficertohavereasonablesuspicion.

FourLevelTestforEvaluatingStreetEncountersInitiatedbyLawEnforcement
Level4

ProbableCause

Seize(Arrest)+SearchIncidenttothatArrest

Level3

ReasonableSuspicion

Stop+Frisk(LimitedSeizure)

Level2

FoundedSuspicion

RighttoInquire(NewYork)

Level1

ObjectiveCredibleReason

RequestInformation(Peoplev.Debour)

Sibronv.NewYork
Facts:
Officerseesdefendantspeakswithseveralknownnarcoticsaddicts.Defendant
goesintorestaurant.Officerapproacheshimandtellshimtostepoutside.Reachesinto
hispocketandfindsheroin.
10

DefenseArgument:
Evenifhehadreasonablesuspicion,hecouldnotreachintohis
pocketbecausethatgoesbeyondastopandfrisk.
Holding:
Noreasonablesuspicion.

Alabamav.White(Hearsay)
Issue:
Whathappenswhenanofficeractsonhearsay?
Holding:
Policeofficerscanrelyonhearsayforreasonablesuspicionaslongasithasa
predictivequality.Itmusthavesomeindiciaofreliabilitythatcanpredictfuture
behavior.
Prado/Navarette
Anonymousinformation/tipscanbereliedonforpredictability
sufficientforreasonablesuspicion(Limitedtoerraticdriving?)
Floridav.JL
Anonymoustipsregardinggunsstillrequireindiciaofreliability
similartoAlabamav.White.Itdoesnotamounttoreasonablesuspicion.

Illinoisv.Wardlow(Flight)
Facts:
Areaknownforseriousnarcoticstrafficking.Policeincarinvestigatearea.Police
lookanddefendantflees.
ProsecutionArgumentU
nprovokedflightfromthepoliceshouldbeperse
unreasonableandisinherentlysuspicious.Policeshouldbeallowedtobestopandfrisk
becauseofreasonablesuspicion.
Holding:
Flightissimplyamanifestationofonesconstitutionalrighttomoveon.There
wasreasonablesuspicionbuttherewillbenobrightlinerule.
Needflight+knowledge
ofahighcrimeareatogetreasonablesuspicion.

U.S.v.Weaver(RacialProfiling)
Facts:
Officerseesdefendantgetoffflight.Caughtofficersattentionbecausehewasa
blackmanwithbaggoingtowardstaxistand.
Holding:
Itisoktoconsiderraceaslongasitiscoupledwithotherfactors.Race
considerationsbythemselvesareunconstitutional.

WhatisaTerrySeizureforwhichreasonablesuspicionisnecessary?
TerryDefinitionN
otallinteractionsbetweenpoliceofficersandcitizensareseizures.
Onlybymeansof
physicalforce
OR
showofauthority
wheretheofficerrestrainsa
citizenslibertymayweconcludethataseizurehasoccurred.

UnitedStatesv.Mendenhall
Facts:
OfficersusedrugcourierprofiletoapproachMs.Mendenhall.Theyasktosee
herID.Sheproducesadriverslicensebutherticketwasinadifferentname.She
becomesshakenandclearlynervous.
DefendantargumentS
hewasseizedthemomenttheofficerswentuptoher.Evenif
theyhadreasonablesuspicion,theywereonlylimitedtoastopandfrisk
11

Plaintiffargument
GlosstotheTerryTestWouldareasonablepersonfeelfreeto
leave.Eveniftherewasaseizure,therewasamplereasonablesuspicionforastopand
frisk.
HoldingFreetoLeaveTest:A
personhasbeenseizedwithinthemeaningofthe4th
Amendmentonlyifintheviewofallthecircumstancessurroundingtheincident,a
reasonablepersonwouldhavebelievedthathewasnotfreetoleave.
Reasonable
personinthatpersonsshoes.
Factors:
Threateningpresenceofseveralofficer
Displayofaweaponbyanofficer
physicaltouching
useoflanguageortone

Floridav.Royer
Facts:
Policeseepersoninairport.TheystophimandaskhimforhisIDandaskedhim
toaccompanythemtotheiroffice.TheyholdhisIDandticket.
Holding:
Theinitialencounterwasnotaseizure.Bykeepingtheticket,theencounter
transformedintoaseizurebecauseareasonablepersonwouldbelievethattheywere
notfreetoleave.

Michiganv.Chesternut
Facts:
Policeseekidlookatthemandrun.Policegiveschaseintheircar
Issue:
Wouldareasonablepersonwouldfeelthattheywereseizedwhenacaris
chasingthem?
Holding:
Noseizureuntilpolicegivechase.Noreasonablepersonwouldbelievethat
therewasaseizurebecausenoflashlights,nosirens,nogunsdrawn.Reasonable
personwouldbelievetheywerefreetoleave.Pursuitinapolicecardoesnotconstitute
aseizure.

HodariD(Whendoespursuitconstituteaseizure?)
Facts:
Kidtakesflightfromcopsanddropsdrugs.
Holding:
Evenifthereasonablepersonwouldhavefeltwasnotfreetoleave,
no
seizurehereoccurredbecausethedefendantdidntstop.Inordertobeseized
youhavetosubmittotheauthorityorbesubdued.

USv.Jeter(6thcircuit)
Facts:
Policebumrushedknownloiteringspot.Defendantisridinghisbikeoutofthe
parkinglotwhenthepoliceenters.Twocopsapproachhim.Hetriestogetaway.Police
getoutthecar.Hestopsforamomentandthenruns.
DefenseArgument:
Whenthedefendantgotoffhisbike,thatwasaseizurebecausehe
submitstoauthorityatthatpoint.Flightalonewasnotareasonablesuspicion.
Holding:
Themomentarypauseisnotasubmissiontoauthority.Thereforetherewas
notaseizure.
12

WhendoesaSeizureEqualanArrestforwhichprobablecauseisneeded?
FactorstodetermineaTerryStopfromaDeFactoarrest(UnitedStatesv.Rabbia
1stCircuit):
Locationanddurationofthestop
Numberofficerspresent
degreeofphysicalrestraintplacedonthesuspect
Informationconveyedtoandfromthesuspect

SEARCHOFTHEHOME
Policeofficerscannotenterthehomewithoutawarrant.Therearesomeexceptions

Peytonv.NewYork
Facts:
Policehaveprobablecausetoarrestpeyton.Theygotohishousewithouta
warranttoarresthim
Holding:
The4thAmendmentprohibitswarrantless
nonconsensual
entryintoa
suspects
home
inordertomakea
routine
arrest.(Physicalentryinthehomeisthe
chiefevilPolicecantcrossthethresholdofyourdoor)
Exceptions:
Consent
:Voluntaryrelinquishmentofaconstitutionalright(Murky
proposition)
Dontneedawarrantifitsnotexactlyinthehome
(Policestillmust
haveprobablecause)
ExigentCircumstances(
Notimetogetawarrant+Policemuststill
haveprobablecause)
FourExigencies:
1. HotPursuit(Gravityofthecrimematters)
2. Imminentdestructionofevidence
3. Escape
4. Dangertopoliceandtoothers

UnitedStatesv.Santana
Facts:
Santanaretreatsintothevestibuleandgetsarrested
Issue:
Wasthevestibuleapublicorprivateplace
Holding:
Thearrestwasinitiatedinapublicplaceandyoucantdefeatanarrestmade
inapublicplaceevenifyouretreatintoaprivateplace

Wardenv.Hayden(ExpansiveViewofHotPursuit)
Facts:
defendantcommittedrobberybeforeenteringhouse.Later,policesearchhouse
withoutwarrant.
Holding:
Theexigenciesofthecircumstancemadeitimperative.(Potentialtoexpand
hotpursuitbecausetherobberyhappenedmomentsearlieranexpansionofhot
pursuit)

13

Valev.Louisiana
Facts:
Policehavewarrantforarrestbutnotawarranttosearch.Policearrestdefendant
onfrontsteps.Policethensearchthehouseandfinddrugs.
Holding:
Merepresenceofthirdpersonsisnotanexigencythatwillallowasearchof
thehome.Thegoodseizedwerenotintheprocessofdestructionorbeingremoved.
(Imminentdestructionofevidencenotatissuehere)

Kentuckyv.King
Facts:
Narcoticsofficersfollowadrugsuspectintoanapartmentcomplex.Defendant
theyrelookingforsoldcrackcocainetoinformant.Suspectdoesnotknowthepoliceare
chasinghim.Policelosesightofthesuspect.Theyturnthecornerandthereare2
apartments.Theysmellmarijuanaandassumethatthedoorwasrecentlyopened.They
knockonthedoorandshoutpolice.Theyheardsoundsinsideandwereconcernedthat
evidencewasbeingdestroyed.
StateCourtHolding:
Illegalsearch.Youneedawarrant.Bybangingonthedoor,the
policecreatedtheexigentcircumstancethemselves.
SupremeCourtHolding:R
emandedbacktostatecourtbecausetheofficersmay
createtheexigency
StateCourtonRemand:
Notenoughevidenceheretoshowimminentdestructionof
evidence.Thereforenoexigentcircumstance.Noisesnotenough.

Turrubiatev.State
Facts:
Investigatorgoestodefendantshomeandknocks.Ownersticksouthishead
andsmellsmarijuana.Callspoliceandandtheydothesame.Theysmellmarijuanaand
goinsidehome.
Holding:
Insufficientevidencetotopermitawarrantlesssearchofhomebecauseno
imminentdestructionofevidence.Merepresenceofdrugsdoesnotmeanthatthey
woulddestroythedrugs.Iftheyweretograntthepolicetosearchthehome,thent

Statev.Walker
Facts:
Defendantopensdoorwhilesmokingpot.
Holding:
Therewasexigentcircumstancebecauseheclosedthedoorimminent
destructionofevidence

USv.Ramirez
Facts:
Wellknowndrugdealeropensdoorandseescops.Thenshutsthedoors
Holding:
Noexigentcircumstancesbecausenoevidence.
Nosink,toiler,deadboltlocksounds

14


SEARCHESANDSEIZURESOFCARS,CONTAINERS,ANDOBJECTS

AutomobileExceptiontoaSearchwithoutawarrant
Ifpoliceofficershaveprobablecausetobelievethatthereisevidenceinthecar,they
cansearchthecarwithoutawarrant

Carrolv.UnitedStates
Holding:
Readymobilityofcarsmakesitimpracticaltogetawarrant

Californiav.Carney
Facts:
Defendantshomeisafullymobilemotorhome.Policehadinfothatdefendant
usethehometoexchangesexfordrugs.Policeknockondoor,defendantstepsoutand
policegoinandsearchthehome.
Holding:NewAutomobileExceptionY
ouhavealesserexpectationofprivacyina
carbecauseofpervasiveregulations.Aslongasprobablecauserequirementismetyou
candispensewiththewarrantrequirement.Norequirementofexigencyforasearch
withoutawarrant

Wyomingv.Houghton
Facts:
Carwith3passengersstoppedbycopsforspeedinganddrivingforafaulty
brakelight.Theyseeasyringe.Policethensearchcarandfindapursewithnarcotics.
Issue:
Whathappenswhentheprobablecauseisnotdirectedataninnocentparty
Holding:
Expectationsofprivacyforpassengersarealsoreduced.Policecansearch.

PlainviewDoctrine(DealswithSeizurewithoutaWarrant)
Ifofficersarelawfullyonthepremisesandseecontraband,theydon'tneedawarrantto
seizeit.
3Requirements
Istheofficerviewingtheitemfroma
lawfulvantagepoint
exigentcircumstances,hotpursuit,etc.
Policeofficermusthavea
rightofphysicalaccess
totheobject
Theobjectsnaturehassomethingsubjecttoseizurethatis
immediately
apparent
guns,drugs,incriminatingevidence
OfficershavealotoflatitudetosearchitemsbecauseofTexasv.
Brown

Arizonav.Hicks
Facts:
Policeofficersenterthedefendantshousewithoutawarrantbecausebulletfired
intotheapartmentbelow.Officersseestereothatsoutofplaceandbelievestheyare
stolen.Officerflipsstereoovertogetserialnumber.Hegetsserialnumberanditturns
outthey'restolen.
15

Holding:
Notanappropriateseizurebecausetheofficersactofflippingstereoover

Texasv.Brown
Holding:
Inordertoseizeevidencetheofficermusthaveprobablecausetoassociate
thepropertywithcriminalactivitybasedonanyarticulablefacts/reasonablebelief
(doesnthavetobe51%).
ModifiesImmediatelyapparentrequirementoftheplainview
doctrine.Courtlookstowhattheofficerreasonablyknewatthetimeoftheseizure.
(Officerhasalotoflatitudetoseizeitemswhentheyarelawfullyinthehome)

CONSENTSEARCHES

Consent(ExceptiontotheWarrantRequirement)
Consentcantbetheresultofcoercionexpressorimplied.Itmustbemorethanmere
acquiescencetoashowofauthority.
FourElements:
Actual,validconsent(bywordsoractions)
Voluntary(wasthereanyduress/coercionsuchthatwillisoverborne)
hardtoprovethatconsentwasinvoluntary
ThirdParty(realvsapparentcommonauthorityoverpremisesorpersonalproperty)
ScopeRevocation

TesttodetermineifconsentisvoluntaryTotalityofcircumstances.

Bumperv.NorthCarolina
Facts:
OfficersayshehasasearchwarranttosearchdefendantshomeGrandmother
saysgoahead.Turnsoutthereisnovalid.
Issue:
Wastheconsentvoluntary?
Holding:
Notvoluntaryconsentbecauseofthenatureofthepolicelie.Basicallytold
defendantthatshehasnorighttoresist.

UnitedStatesv.Basquez
Holding:
Erroneousmistakestillamountstoinvoluntaryconsent

UnitedStatesv.Christian
Holding:
Consentbasedonafalserepthatpolicecouldsecureasearchwarrantis
involuntary.

Consentbasedonatruerepresentationthatapolicecouldsearchawarrantisvoluntary

UnitedStatesv.Worley
Facts:
Policeofficersstopdefendantandasktospeakwithhimanddefendantsays
yes.Officersaskcanwelookinyourbag.Defendantsaysyouvegotthebadge,I
guessyoucan
16

Holding:
Itwasinvoluntary.Oneofthefactors:officerdidnotinformhimofhisrightto
refuse.Otherfactors:language,showofauthorityetc
Commonwealthv.Rogers
Facts:
OfficerknocksonthedoorsandsaysheslookingforRodgers.RoseHopkins
pointstothedirectionoftheapartmentandcopwalksin.FindsRodgers
Holding:
Courtholdsthereisnoconsent.Courtrecognizedthatoccupantsgestures
suchasthiscanbe
impliedconsent.

Schnecklothv.Bustamonte
Facts:
Policeseeacarwhereheadlightburnedout.Theyaskforpermissiontosearch
thecar.Oneofthemeninthecarsayssuregoahead.Policerecoverevidence.
DefensesArgument:
Defendantwasnttoldhehadarighttorefuse.(Factorintotality
ofcircumstances)
Holding:
Courtdrawsadistinction.Generalprinciplethatyoucanwaiveyourrightsifits
voluntarily,knowingly,andintelligentlyisforjurytrials.Policeneednotinformofaright
torefuse.(Takeawayitisafactorandnotdispositive).

RevocationorWithdrawalofConsent
Consentoncegivenmaybedrawn,revokedorlimitedatanytimepriortotheconsentof
thesearch.Youmustdosounequivocally.

Burtonv.UnitedStates(DCCourtofAppeals)
Facts:
OfficersapproachBurtonaskforconsenttosearchhisluggageandpersonfor
drugs.Whentheystartedtosearchhisjacket,hegrabbedhisjacketpocket.Officer
orderedhimtomovehishand.
Issue:
Wastheactarevocationofconsent?
Holding:
Notarevocationbecauseofficersgoingforwardwouldhavetoanalyzeevery
gesture.Slipperyslopeargument.

Floridav.Jimeno(ScopeofConsent)
Issue:
Whetherconsenttosearchacaramountstoconsenttosearchcontainerstherein
Holding:
Objectivereasonablenessstandard.Whatwouldareasonablepersonwould
believethescopewas.Apersonmayalsolimitconsent.

Statev.Howell
Facts:
Defendantstoppedforspeeding.Policeasktosearchentirecar.Findsgiftrap
boxandopensit.Findsmarijuana.
Holding:
Defendantdidnotlimitscopeordidnottrytorevokeit.

UnitedStatesv.LopezCruz(9thCircuit)
Holding:
AskingforcellphoneandthenusingittocallPOisoutscopethescopeof
consent.

17

Stonerv.California
Facts:
Officersaskclerktotakethemtodefendantsroom.Theyfindevidence.
Issue:
Canathirdpartyprovidevalidconsenttosearches?
ProsecutorArguments:
Hotelguestisgivingimpliedconsent.Clerkhadapparent
authoritytoapplyconsent.
Holding:
Evidencesuppressed.Noevidencethatthedefendantexpresslyauthorized
theclerktoconsenttoasearch.

Frazierv.Cupp
Facts:
PoliceofficerssearchdufflebagownedbybothFrazierandFrazierscousin.
Frazierdidnotgiveconsenteventhoughcousindid.
Holding:
Frazier
assumedtherisk
.Allowsfora3rdpartytoconsenttoasearchto
communalproperty.

USv.Matlock(Whatamountstocommonauthority)
Facts:
Sharedhomeoccupants.Defendantarrestedinfrontyard.Policetakehimaway
andaskiftheycansearchtheroomthattheyshared.Theyneveraskedthedefendant.
Holding:
Consenttoasearchbyonewhosharesacommonauthorityorpremisesor
effectsisvalidagainstanabsentpartyeveniftheydidnotconsent.Defininition
Commonauthorityrestsonjointaccessorcontrolformutualpurposes.

Wisconsinv.Sobczak
Facts:
SobczakinvitedPadellaandshearrivedathisresidencetospendtheweekend.
Sobzcakreportedtobarforwork.Sheaskstousehislaptop.Sheobservedandcalled
grandmothertocallpolice.Sheinvitesofficerinside.
Holding:
Courtrejectedthattheargumentthat3rdpartyconsentdoesnotextendto
weekendguests.Shehadcommonauthority.

Hubertv.StateofTexas(Relatives)
Facts:
Officersarrestdefendant.Theyaskgrandmothertosearchdefendantsbedroom.
Theyfindagun.
DefendantsArgument:
Grandfathercanthavecommonauthorityoverdefendants
privatebedroom
Holding:
Grandfatherwasimbuedwiththecommonauthoritytosearchthebedroom
becauseofthenatureoftheirlivingarrangement.(Familycontext)

Georgiav.Randolph(DuelingConsent&CommonAuthority)
Facts:
JanetandScottRandolph.JanetcallspoliceandtellsthemthatScottisdrug
user.Janetsaidthereareitemsofdrugevidenceinthehouse.Policeasksforconsent
tosearchthehouse.JanetsaysyesandScottsaysno.
Issue:
Isthereconsentwherethereisduelingresponsesfrom2occupants.
18

Holding:
Validconsentwasnotgiven.Policecouldnotenter.Awarrantlesssearchofa
shareddwellingagainsttheexpressedconsentofa
physicallypresent
individual
cannotbevalid.Ifthereisdomesticviolenceand/orexigentcircumstances,theycango
in.
Peoplev.Fuerst
Holding:
Youhavetobephysicallypresentatthemomenttheconsentisbeinggiven

UnitedStatesv.Johnson(6thCircuit)
Holding:
Aslongas1individualhascommonauthority

Fernandezv.California
Facts:
Policeofficersapproachdoorofahome.Policeasktocomein.Defendantsays
thatheknowshisrightsandthepolicecannotenter.Policearresthimandcomeback
later.Theyaskthewifetoenterandshesaysyes.Theyenterandfindincriminating
evidence.
Holding:
Aresidentsobjectiontoawarrantlesssearchwillnotpreventpolicefrom
obtainingconsenttosearchiftheyremovethenonconsentingpartylawfullyfromthe
premises.Randolphwasalimitedexception.Itappliesonlywhentheobjectoris
physicallypresent.

Illinoisv.Rodriguez
Facts:
PolicerespondtoDorothyJacksonshouse.Daughteropensthedoor.Signsof
physicalabuse.Saysdefendantrodriguezisthecause.HesinanotherapartmentTells
thepolicethatshewillopenthedoorforthem.Referredtoapartmentasourapartment.
Officergoandfindevidence.
Issue:
Doesshehavecommonauthority.Isawarrantlessentryvalidbasedona3rd
partywhenthepolicereasonably
Holding:
TestReasonable.Officersmustbereasonableinbelievingthatconsenting
partyhadcommonauthorityoverthepremises.Theydon'thavetobecorrect(Good
Faith)

Commonwealthv.Lopez(MassachusettsStateCourt)
Facts:
Officersaskediftheycouldcomeinsidewhenthemanagerwasn'tpresent.
Holding:
Policemustdomorebywayofassentbeforedetermininga3rdpartyhas
commonauthority.Theymustexerciseadiligentinquiry.

Arriguin(9thCircuitCase)
Holding
Policehadadutytoclarify.Policemayproceedonthenotionthatignoranceis
bliss

UnitedStatesv.Hassak(2ndCircuit)CanProtectiveSweepbeusedafteraConsent
Search?

19

Holding:
Policecantextendprotectivesweeptoconsentsearches.Policecreatethe
dangerinthoseinstancesasopposedtoexigentcircumstancesandSILA.
MIRANDATHEWARNINGS
Coercedconfessionsviolate5thAmendmentdueprocessclauseandareinadmissibleevenif
thereisampleevidencethattheevidenceistrue.Reason:Deterringpolicefrommistreating
people.

Brownv.Mississippi
Facts:

Twoindividualswereconvictedofmurder,theonlyevidenceofwhichwastheir
ownconfessionsthatwereprocuredafterviolentinterrogation.
Holding:
Theconfessionmightbefalseandcouldleadtotheconvictionofinnocent
people.

Dickersonv.UnitedStates
Facts:
CongresspassedalawoverturningMiranda
Holding:
CourtupholdsMiranda.Thewarningshavebecomepartofournational
culture.

Mirandav.Arizona
Facts:
Issue:
Holding:
Prosecutionmaynotusestatementsofadefendantstemmingfrom
custodial
interrogation
unlessitshowsthat
proceduralsafeguardse
ffectivetosecurethe
privilegeagainstselfincriminationwereused.
Custodialinterrogation=custodyorotherwisedeprivedoffreedomina
significantway
Mirandawarningmustbetoldoftherights
Waiveranywaivermustbevoluntary,knowingandintelligentstatementsmust
betrulytheproductoffreechoice.
Policeonlyhavetoreadrightsonlyiftheyareengaginginacustodial
interrogation.
MirandaIssues
Whatiscustodial?coerciveatmo
Whatisinterrogation?
Adequacyofwarningsgiven?
Waiverofright/revocationofwaiver
Invocation/Assertionofrights?(Mainissueissilence)
ExceptiontoMirandaRequirement?
PublicSafety
Routinebookingquestion.(Aslongaslongasitisntreaslikelytoelicitan
incriminatingresponse.)

20

RhodeIslandv.Innis(Interrogation)
Facts:
Defendantaccusedofmurderandrobberyoftaxidriver.Officerreadsdefendant
rights.Defendantasksforalawyer.Onthewaytotheprecinct,theofficerspassedbya
school
Holding:
Warningsarerequiredwhenthereareexpressedinterrogationortheirfunction
equivalent:
wordsoractionsthatofficersshouldknowwouldbereasonablylikely
toelicitanincriminatingresponse.
Peoplev.White
Facts:
17yearoldDefendantarrestedandreadrights.DefendantsaysIdontwantto
speaktoyou.Officer,saidImjusttellingyou,Ihopenobodyelsegetshurtfromthe
gun
Holding:
Officersruminationaboutthelocationofthegunwerenotcalculatedtotake
advantageofthesuspectsvulnerability.

Soto(6thcircuit)
Facts:
Officersbookdefendantatprecinct.Officerseespictureofdefendantsfamily.
Asksdefendantwhatareyoudoingwithcraplikethatwhenyouhaveafamilywaitingat
home?
Issue
Wasitaninterrogation?
Holding:
Therewasaninterrogation.Brevityisnotdispositive.Rhetoricalquestionscan
amounttointerrogation

Payne
Facts:
defendantarrestedfordrugsale.Incaronwaybacktoprecinct.Onwaybackto
precinct,officersaystodefendantthatwefoundaguninyourhouse
Holding:
Statementscanequalinterrogation.Theywerereasonablylikelytoellicitan
incriminatingresponse.

Prioleau
Facts:
Policeinvestigatingdrugactivityandseesdefendant.Policebringdefendant
over.NoonereadhimhisMirandawarnings.DetectiverecognizeshimandsaysWhat's
upMaurice?Defendantthenadded
Holding:
Notreasonableforofficertobelievethatthequestionwouldelicitaresponse

Blake
Facts:
17yroldDefendantarrestedandreceivedwarningsandaskedforalawyer.
Defendantplacedincell.Officercomplieswithstatelawtogivedefendantcopyof
charges.Oneofthechargesincludesdeathincapitalletters.CopsaysIbetyou
wannatalknow,huh?30minslateranddefendantwantstotalk.
Holding:
Notinterrogation.Tauntwasacompletelyisolatedremarkthatdidntamountto
aninterrogation.

Berkermerv.McCarty(Custody)
21

Issue:
Aremirandawarningsrequiredofacustodialinterrogationinatrafficstop.Is
roadsidestoptoaskquestionsaninterrogation?
Holding:TestforCustody
Whetherthedefendantwouldfeelsuchpressurethathis
freeexerciseofhisrighttoremainsilentwouldbeimpaired?
Whethertherewasa
coerciveatmosphere?
Factors:
Detentionwasbriefandpublic.Temporarydetention.
Mirandawarningonlyrequireforseizures.Notforstopsandbelow.(seecharton
page10ofthisoutline)

Illinoisv.Perkins
Facts:
Defendantisinajailcell.Policeplaceundercoverofficerincelltogetevidence
andaskhimtoattemptanescape.Undercoverasksdefendantifhedonesomeone.
Defendantgivesincriminatingresponse.
Holding:
Centralingredientsofa
policedominatedatmospherew
erenotpresent.No
evidenceofcompulsion.DefendantspokefreelyandMirandawasnotrequired.
Missing
theelementofcoercion
.

USv.Perdue(FactorsforCustody?)
Factors:
time,place,person
officerswords,toneofvoice,demeanor
moodoftheinterview
natureofsuspectsverbalornonverbalresponses

3PlacesofCustodialInterrogation
Jail
Precinct
Home/PlaceofEmployment

Carter
Facts:
Defendantsuspectedofmailfraudatbank.defendantinterrogatedatbank.call
intoofficeofbankpresidentfor90minsandinterrogatedbyofficers.Aftergiving
incriminatingevidence,officersgivemiranda.
Holding:
Defendantwasincustody
Factors:Isolatedfromothers,Unfamiliarsurroundings,wasnottoldthathewas
freetoleave

Vermont
Facts:
defendantledtoasmallwindowlessroom.instructedtositinthechair.
Holding:
Custodialbecausereaspersonwouldnotfeelfreetoleave

Statev.Wearing
Facts:
Policetakedefendantsshoes
22

Holding:
Undertotalityofcircumstances,nocustody

UnitedStatesv.Rabbia(1stCircuit)
Facts:
Policestopfriskandhandcuffed.
Holding:
Suspectwasnotincustodybecauseitwasbriefandbecauseitwasdoneto
preservepolicesafety

JDBv.NorthCarolina(CustodyandAge/Capacity)
Facts:
13yearoldboyquestionedwithoutMirandaWarningsathisschool.Urgedtodo
therightthing.Confesses.
Holding:
Youhavetoconsidertheageofthesuspectwhendeterminingwhetherthe
suspectwascustody.Reasoning:childrenaremoresusceptibletocoercion.Recognition
thatyouhavetotakethecapacityofindividualintoconsideration.

Duckworthv.Eagan(Adequac
Facts:
OfficerreadMirandaandsaidhehadrighttolawyerifandwhenyougotocourt
Holding:
Inquiryiswhetherthewarnings
reasonablyconvey
tothesuspecthisorher
rights.Noexactwordshavetobeuttered.

Peoplev.Nitschmann
Facts:
DefendantrecitesMirandabeforeofficerdoes
Holding:
Therewasreasonableconveyance.

Gonzalesv.State(Language&ReasonableConveyance)
Facts:
Defendantcouldnotspeakenglish.Spanishspeakingtrooperattemptedtoread
rightsinspanishanddefendantcouldnotunderstand
Holding:
Notreasonableconveyance.

MatteoRosales(9thCircuitLanguage&ReasonableConveyance)
Facts:
Defendantisspanishspeaking.Detectiveatprecinctreadsrightsinspanishwith
impropertranslation.
Holding:
Noreasonableconveyance.

NYv.Quarrles(PublicSafety)
Facts:
Armedperpetratorrunsintostore.Defendantmatchesdescriptionofrape
suspect.Officerscatcheshimandfindgunholsteronhim.TheyaskhimwithoutMiranda
warningandaskswhere'sthegun
Holding:
PublicSafetyException:Policeofficerswereconfrontedwithanimmediate
necessitytoprotectthepublic

23

USv.Hernandez
Facts:
Defendantadmitshehasheroin.Officerthenaskswhatsinthebag.Defendant
saysmoredrugs
Holding:
Drugsconnectiontosafetyanddiseasebroughttheofficersquestionintothe
publicsafetyexception

USv.Ferguson
Holding:
Passageoftimedoesnotdiminishtheapplicabilityofthepublicsafety
exception

MIRANDATHEWAIVER

Waiver
YoucanwaivemirandarightaslongasitsVoluntary,Knowingly,andIntelligent
Voluntary
=notcoerced
Knowing
=officerinformedthem
Intelligent
=anexpressstatementthatasuspectwaswillingtospeakwithoutan
attorney

TwoIssuesconcerningMirandaWaivers
Righttoalawyerandrighttoremainsilent?
Istheissuecomingupattheoutsetorduringinterrogationafterwaiver

NorthCarolinav.Butler(MirandaWaiver)
Facts:
Defendantwasreadhisrights.Hesaidheunderstoodbutrefusedtosignaform.
Defendantsaid,IwilltalktoyoubutIwillnotsignanyforms.
Issue:
Wasthereawaiverofhisrights?
Holding:
Meresilenceisnotenoughtoindicateawaiverofrights.Needssilence+
understandofrights+courseofconduct.Explicitstatementofwaiverisnotinvariably
necessary.Insomecases,waivercanbeinferred.
MirandaLanguage(avalidwaiverwillnotpresumedifthereissilenceafterreading
Mirandarights.Awaiverwillnotbepresumedifapersonspeaksaftergivingawaiver.

Moranv.Burbine(Waiver)
Facts:
Defendantarrestedinmurdercase.Attorneycalledtheprecinctandwantedtobe
presentforinterrogation.Policeofficersdidnottelldefendantthathenowhadalawyer.
PoliceofficersthenreadMirandaandthendefendantgivesincriminatingevidence.
Holding:
Policeofficersweren'trequiredtodivulgetheinformationthatthedefendant
hadalawyer.Mirandawarningsarenotaconstitutionalright.Courtexplicitlyrejectsthe
viewthatadefendantshouldgetalawyerassoonasfeasible
.

24

Kirkv.Ohio(OhioSupremeCourt)
Facts:
18yearoldwithcognitiveimpairment.Defendantreadmirandaandwaives.
Holding:
Themereexistenceofimpairmentisnotatissue.Thefocusiswhatthe
defendantmanifestedatthemomenthewasreadhisrights.

Michiganv.Mosley(AssertingMirandaRighttoRemainSilent)
Facts:
Defendantarrestedforrobberies.Advisedofrights.Saysno.Anotherdetective
comesinlater.Detectivereadhimhisrightsagainanddefendantwaives.
Holding:
Aninterrogationcanresumeaslongaslawenforcement
scrupulously
honors
thedefendantsassertionofhisrights.(FactbaseddeterminationTotalityof
Circumstances)
Factors:Reasonableperiodoftimehaspassed,sameordiffofficers,newsetof
mirandawarnings,discussionofsameordifferentcrime

Edwardsv.Arizona(InvocationoftheRighttoCounsel)
Facts:
Defendantagreestospeakbutwantsalawyerpresent.Nextmorning,2officers
cometohimtoresumequestioning.Defendantanswersquestions.
Holding:
Whenasuspectassertshisrighttoconsultanattorney,nointerrogationcan
resumeuntilalawyerispresent
unless
theaccusedhimselfinitiatesfurther
conversationwiththepolice.

Arizonav.Roberson(InvocationoftheRighttoCounselProtectiveShield)
Holding:
Policecantcontinueinterrogationaftersuspectassertsrighttocounsel
becausedefendanthedoesnthaveknowlegeorintelligence.

Minnickv.Mississippi
Holding:
Defendantcannotbeinterrogatedonceheassertshisrighttoattorny.

Statev.McKnight
Facts:
Defendantstatesthathewantsa
lawyer.Officerthenasksdefendantforthe
descriptionofhishome,sothattheycangetasearchwarrant.Defendantthenasks
whatwasgoingtohappennext.
Holding:
Defendantsinquiryaboutwhatisgoingtohappenabouthishomedidnot
reinitiatediscussionabouttheinvestigation

USv.Hutchins
Peoplev.Elliot(MichiganSupremeCourt)

Connecticutv.Barrett(InvocationoftheRighttoCounsel)
Facts:
defendanttellspolicehewillnotputanythinginwritinguntilalawyerispresent.
Hehadnoproblemwithtalkingthough
25

Issue:
Wasthisaninvocationofarighttocounsel?
Holding:
Defendantmadealimitedrequestforcounselthatwasaccompaniedby
affirmativeannouncementofwillingnesstospeak.Therefore,notaninvocationofrightto
counsel.

Davisv.UnitedStates(InvocationofaRighttoCounselAmbiguous/Unambiguous
Requests)
Facts:
Defendantchargedwithbeatingvictimtodeath.Defendantinitiallywaives.90
minutesin,defendantsaysmaybeIshouldtalktoalawyer.After,thattherewasfurther
interrogationandincriminatingstatements.
Issue:
Wasthisisaninvocationofarighttocounsel?
Holding:
Ifthesuspectsreferencetoalawyeris
ambiguousorequivocali
nthata
reasonableofficerinthosecircumstanceswouldunderstandthatthesuspect
might
havebeenaninvocation,anofficercanproceedwiththeinterrogation.Thesuspect
mustunambiguouslyarticulatethattheywantalawyersothatitwouldbecleartoa
reasonableofficer.
Courtdeclinestoadoptarulerequiringpoliceofficerstoclarify.

Statev.Eastlack
Facts:
DefendantsaysIthinkIbettertalktoalawyerfirst.
Holding:
Policecancontinueinterrogationbecausenoclearinvocation.Wasnota
sufficientlycleararticulation.

Peoplev.Romero
Facts:
DefendantsaysIshouldtalkalawyer
Holding:
Romerospatternofspeechtakenintoconsideration.Hiswordsweredeemed
tobeunambiguousandthereforeaninvocations.

Hardenv.Mississippi(MississippiSupremeCourt)
Facts:
DefendantdiagnosedwithmildretardationsaysIhavearighttoalawyer?Icant
affordone.
Holding:
Noclearorunambiguousrequestforcounsel.Thereforenoinvocation

Peoplev.SosedaContreras
Facts:
Defendantreadhisrights.DefendantsaysIfyoucanbringmealawyer,thenI
cantellyou.
Holding:
Itwasambiguous.

Motley
Facts:
DefendantsaysImightwanttotalktomylawyer.Thensayshislawyersname
andgiveshisbusinesscard.
Holding:
Unambiguousinvocationoftherighttocounsel

26


UnitedStatevOkendoLivas(1stCircuit)
Facts:
defendantisgivenamirandawaiverform.Defendantrefusestosigntheform.20
minutelaterafederalagentcomestotalktohimandgiveshimanotherform.Defendant
saysIdon'tunderstandthis.Mylawyerspeaks.Laterhesignstheformand
incriminateshimself.
Issue:
1)Washisrighttoremainsilentscrupulouslyhonored?2)Wastherean
invocationoftherighttocounsel?
Holding:
HisrighttoremainsilentwasscrupulouslyhonoredbecauseofMosleyfactors.
Thiswasnotaninvocationofarighttocounsel.

RighttoRemainSilent
Mustassertedunambiguouslyorunequivocallyfromtheviewpointofareasonable
officer

UnitedStatesv.Mikell(InvocationofRighttoRemainSilent)
Holding:
Asuspectsrefusaltoanswerquestionsisnottantamounttoaninvocationofarightto
remainsilent

Statev.Williams
Facts:
Defendantwaivedrightsandisbeingquestioned.Saysidonthavetotakeany
moreofyourbullshitandwalkstothebackofhiscell.Officerthengoesintohiscelland
asksfurtherquestions.Defendantincrimi
Issue:
Ishostilebehaviorananumabiguousassertionoftherighttoremainsilent.
Holding:
Notanassertionofrighttoremainsilent.

Peoplev.Manzo
Facts:
Defendantadvisedofhisrights.After8seconds,defendantsaysIamdoingmy
rightCopscontinuetointerrogate.
Holding:
Courtholdsthatitwasanunambiguousassertionofrights

DeVineyv.State
Facts:
DefendantwaivesandrepeatedlysaysImdoneandIwanttogohome.Ididnt
dothis.Youshowme
Holding:
ThefactthathesaidImdonemultipletimesshowsthathemadeanassertion
ofhsirighttoremainsilent

Valov.Ciera
Facts:
Defendantstatedhedidntwanttotalk.Officerasksareyousure?Defendant
thensayssureandincriminateshimself
Holding:
Onceasuspectaffiramtivelyinvokestheirright,officerscannotcontinue
questions

27

Burgessv.Thompkins(AssertingRighttoRemainSilentRemainingSilent)
Facts:
Defendantlargelysilentduringthecourseofhisinterrogation.Doesntexpressly
assertrightsorexpresslywaiverights.
Issue:
Whetherheinvokedandwhetherhewaived?
6thCircuitHolding:
Defendantwassilentfor2hoursand45mins.Defendants
persistentsilencerelayedaclearandunequivocalmessagethatheassertedhisrightto
remainsilent.
SupremeCourtHolding:R
ighttoremainsilentmustbeinvokedunambiguouslyand
unequivocallysimilartorighttoinvocationtocounsel.Meresilenceisnotenoughto
indicateawaiverofrights.

DUEPROCESSLIMITSONINTERROGATION
Statementsmadebysuspectscannotbetheproductofcoercion.Theymustbefreelymade.
Statementsobtainedinvoluntarilyareinadmissible.Influencebylawenforcementcanbe
exertedaslongasitisnotcoercive.EvidencesuppressedonDueProcessgroundsis
suppressedandcannotbeusedtoimpeach.
TesttodetermineDueProcessviolation:T
otalityofthecircumstances.Whetherthepersons
willwasoverborne.
Remember:2waystoassessstatementsmadebysuspects.FirstisthroughMiranda.Second
isthroughDueProcessanalysis.

Brahmv.UnitedStates(1897)
Holding:
Aconfessionmustnotbeextractedbyanysortofthreatorviolencenor
obtainedbyanydirectorimpliedpromises,howeverslightnorbytheexertionofany
influence.Astatementobtainedbyanysuchexertionisnotadmissible.

VoluntarinessAboutThreats
Threatsofphysicalforce
Violence(Statementsobtainedbyviolenceare
byinlarge
inadmissible)
PromisesofLeniency
ThreatsofHarsherTreatment
Threatdoesnthavetocomefromlawenforcement

Peoplev.Thomas
Facts:
Defendantquestionedover2days.Takentoahospitalandbackwithnosleep.
Eventuallyconfesses
Holding:
Confessionwasaproductofcoercion.

28


Doodyv.Schriro
Facts:
Involvedthemurderofsixbuddhistmonks.13yearoldinterrogatedextensively
Holding:
Interrogationwascoercive.

Arizonav.Fulminante(ThreatsofViolenceCoercionandHarmlessErrorAnalysis)
Facts:
Defendantbecomesfriendswithfellowinmate.Fellowinmateactingforlaw
enforcementtellsdefendantthatIwillprotectyoubutyouhavetotellmewhat
happened.
Holding:
DueProcessviolationbecausetherewasa
crediblethreat
(threatlikelytobe
actedon).Thiswasacoercedconfession.However,acoercedconfessionisstillsubject
toa
harmlesserroranalysis(outcomewontbeaffectedsotheconvictionwontbe
overturned).

Peoplev.Rice
Holding:Thefulminanteruleonlyappliestopsychologicalthreatsofcoercion.
Youcanonlyengageinharmlesserrorifitinvolvespsychologicalpressure

Millerv.Fenton(PsychologicalCoercion)
Issue:
Didtheinterrogationincludepsychologicalmanipulationofsuchmagnitudeasto
renderthe
Holding:
Psychologicalpressureispermittedaslongasitdoesn'tgotoofarand
becomescoercive.
Factorstodeterminewhetherpsychologicalpressuregoestoofar
Lengthofdetention
Dayornight?
Heldincommunicado?(Heldwithoutbeingabletotalktoanyone)
Personalmakeupofthesuspect(Age,intelligence,etc)
Lackofadvice
Lackoffood

Statev.Polk(PromisesofLeniency)
Facts:
Officertolddefendantcountyattorneywillbemorelikelytoworkwithhimifhe
cooperated.Officeralsosaidtodefendantthatheshouldntleavehischildrenbehind.
Defendantthengivesexculpatoryevidence.
Issue:
Wasthestatementinvoluntary
Holding:
Officercrossedthelinebetweenapermissiblestatementthatcooperation
wouldhelpandmakingan
impermissiblepromiseofleniency.
Promisesofleniency
willoverbearsomeoneswill.

Statev.Madsen(IowaRulePromiseofLeniency)
Facts:
Officerstellsdefendanttocomecleansothathecankeepdefendantsnameout
ofthepaperandtodotherightthingforhisfamily.
29

Holding:
Impermissiblepromiseofleniencybecauseofpreyingonthefamily.
Ifthereis
apromiseofleniency,anystatementmadebythesuspectisperseinvoluntary.

Statev.Howard(Iowa)
Facts:
Detectivefirstelicitedthedefendantsacknowledgementthatwhoeverdidthis
neededpsychologicaltreatment.Detectivethenofferedtohelphimanddefendant
confesses.
Issue:
Whetherthedefendantsstatementswereinvoluntarybasedonpromiseof
leniency

Hillv.State(PromisesofLeniency)
Facts:
Childreportedtopolicethatthedefendantmolestedher.Childthenrecordedthe
defendanttoapologizewiththehelpwiththepolice.Policecalldefendanttoprecincttold
defendantthatthefamilydidntwanttoseehimgetintrouble.Theyjustwantan
apology.
Holding:
Statementwasimpermissible.Ifanacusedis
induced
tomakeastatementin
relianceofanofficerspromisetoescapeprosecution,itisimpermissible.

UnitesStatesv.Jacques(ThreatsofHarshTreatment)
Facts:
Lawenforcementthreatenedlongersentenceanddefendantsfather.
Holding:Threataloneisnotenough.Alsoneedthreat+additionalfacts.

Peoplev.Ramadon(ThreatsofHarshTreatment)
Facts:
Lawenforcementthreateneddeportation
Holding:
Threatcrossedthelineandconstitutedharshtreatment

Ledbetterv.Edwards(DeceptionandFalseStatements)
Facts:
OfficerfalselytoldLedbetterthatvictim
Holding:
Defendantswillisnotoverbornesimplybecauseheisledtobelievethatthe
governmentsknowledgeofhisguiltisgreaterthanitactuallyis

Oritzv.Olibe(FalseSympathy)
Facts:
Lawenforcementagentpretendingtobeacaligraphergets18yearold
defendanttomakestatementsaftermotheringhim.
Holding:
Statementwasvoluntary

Bondv.State(FalseSympathy)
Facts:
During3hourinterrogationdetectiveurgedtodefendantnottoexposehimselfto
theracistwhimsofajury.Defendantthenconfesses.
Holding:
Defendantswillwasoverborne.
30


LineupsTwoMainIssues(NOTBEINGTESTED)
Righttocounsel
Fundamentalrighttodueprocess

FruitofthePoisonousTreeDoctrine
evidencegatheredwiththeassistanceofillegallyobtainedinformationmustbeexcluded
fromtrial.Thus,ifanillegalinterrogationleadstothediscoveryofphysicalevidence,
boththeinterrogationandthephysicalevidencemaybeexcluded,theinterrogation
becauseoftheexclusionaryrule,andthephysicalevidencebecauseitisthefruitofthe
illegalinterrogation.Thisdoctrineissubjecttothreeofimportantexceptions.The
evidencewillnotbeexcluded(1)ifitwasdiscoveredfromasourceindependentofthe
illegalactivity(2)itsdiscoverywasinevitableor(3)ifthereisattenuationbetweenthe
illegalactivityandthediscoveryoftheevidence.

Oregonv.Elstad
Facts:
Defendantinterrogatepersonwithoutmirandawarnings.Defendantconfesses.
Latertheyreadmirandaandgetconfessionagain.Defendantarguesfruitofthe
poisonoustree.
Holding:
Notfruitofthepoisonoustreebecauseitwasinadvertent

31