AAMPLE– Introduction to the Fourth Amendment
Summer 2010 Syllabus
April 2, 2010
PROFESSOR: Marc C. McAllister
OFFICE:Room 522 (Florida Coastal)
PHONE:(904) 680-7746
E-MAIL:
CLASS SESSIONS:Monday / Wednesday, 2:30 – 4:30 p.m.
REQUIRED TEXT
- Joshua Dressler & George C. Thomas III, Criminal Procedure: Investigating Crime, Third Edition (Thomson West 2006), ISBN 978-0-3141-6664-7.
RECOMMENDED TEXTS
- Joshua Dressler & Alan C. Michaels, Understanding Criminal Procedure: Volume 1: Investigation, Fourth Edition (LexisNexis 2006).
- Charles R. Calleros, Law School Exams: Preparing and Writing to Win (Aspen 2007).
- Robert Bloom & Mark Brodin, Criminal Procedure, Examples and Explanations, (Aspen 2007).
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The law of Criminal Procedure is typically divided into two parts: investigationand adjudication. This course focuses oninvestigation, and dealsprimarily with the interactions between the police and those suspected of criminal activity. In this course, we will examine federal case lawinterpretingtheFourth Amendment. Since the purpose of this course is to assess each student’s capacity for legal studies, the materials covered regarding the Fourth Amendment are more limited than would be encountered in a regular law school Criminal Procedure course.
COURSE PURPOSES AND EXPECTED LEARNING OUTCOMES
As part of the AAMPLE admissions program, the primary purpose of this course is to assess student capacity for success in the study of law. In order to succeed in legal studies, a student must develop the ability to engage in the following lawyering skills:
1)Analyze appellate opinions in order to extract relevant principles and rules, draw analogies and distinctions, and develop legal arguments.
2)Articulate important doctrinal rules, standards, and principles from memory; explain what they mean; and provide adequate examples.
3)Demonstrate a practical understanding of legal principles by recognizing issues of law and applying relevant standards and rules when presented in hypothetical and unfamiliar fact patterns.
4)Communicate, orally and in writing, appropriate legal and factual arguments in support of each side of legal controversies.
Each student’s capacity for legal studies will be judged upon his or her performance on a written examination designed to test these critical lawyering skills as applied to the course material.
GRADING
Preparation and Participation: Just as in law school, class participation is an important aspect of this course. Everyone in the class is responsible for reading and briefing the assigned cases, thinking about their significance, preparing assigned problems, and actively participating in on-line class meetings (“Live Classroom”).
Good faith completion of all assignments and quizzes, and participation in all scheduled class meetings, is mandatory. A student who fails to complete assignments or fails to participate adequately may be excluded from the course (and the final exam) in accordance with the AAMPLE participation policy.
Review Quizzes: There will be two multiple-choice review quizzes administered during the course. These quizzes are mandatory, but will not count toward the final grade.
Final Grade: Your final course grade will be determined by your performance on a 3-hour, closed-book examination that will include both multiple choice and essay questions.
QUIZ AND EXAM DATES
First QuizFriday, May 28, 2010
Second QuizFriday, June 11, 2010
Final ExamMonday, June 21, 2010
LIVE CHAT CLASS SCHEDULE
The live classroom sessions for this course will be held on Mondays and Wednesdays. The classroom sessions will begin Monday, May 17, 2010, and will end Wednesday, June 16, 2010.
You will have an opportunity to discuss the course with me on Wednesday, May 12, 2010, from 2:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. During this session, I will be happy to answer questions regarding the content and design of this course, useful study techniques, law school in general, and the practice of law.
There will be no live chat class on Monday, May 31, 2010 (Memorial Day). We will make up this missed class Friday, June 4, 2010(see reading schedule below for details).
READING ASSIGNMENTS
The order of required reading assignments is set forth below. I may also post handoutson the Lexis Course Web Page to supplement the assigned reading. All reading assignments are mandatory. I will assume you have read all of the assigned material and are thoroughly prepared to discuss the material in class.
You should read and brief all of the cases listed in the syllabus below. After these cases you will find “notes” which analyze the main cases and discuss additional cases relevant to that topic. You must also study this note material carefully. You are responsible for, and may be tested upon, all pages assigned.
DATE / TOPIC / READING ASSIGNMENTMon., May 17 / Fourth Amendment Overview; The Exclusionary Rule as Remedy for Fourth Amendment Violations
Wolf v. Colorado, Weeks v. U.S., Mapp v. Ohio / Text, pages 53-74, and pages 174-181
Wed., May 19 / Interpreting the Text: What is a “Search?,”What is a “Seizure?,” and The Warrant Requirement
Katz v. U.S., U.S. v. Karo, California v. Hodari D., Payton v. New York / Text, pages 75-83, 128-131, 379-383, and 162-174
Mon., May 24 / Katzin Application: Part 1 (electronic listening devices and pen registers)
U.S. v. White, Smith v. Maryland / Text, pages 83-105
Wed., May 26 / Katzin Application: Part 2 (curtilage vs. open fields; sense-enhancing technologies)
Kyllo v. U.S. / Text, pages 105-128
Wed., June 2 / Probable Cause
Spinelli v. U.S., Illinois v. Gates / Text, pages 132-162
Friday, June 4 / Warrant Requirement Exceptions: Exigent Circumstances and Plain View
Warden v. Hayden, Arizona v. Hicks, Horton v. California / Text, pages 203-209 (exigent circumstances); and 286-297 (plain view)
Mon., June 7 / Consent Exception to Warrant Requirement: Voluntary Consent and Third-Party Consent
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, Georgia v. Randolph, Illinois v. Rodriguez / Text, pages 297-332
Wed., June 9 / Searches Incident to Arrest as Exception to Warrant Requirement
Chimel v. California, U.S. v. Robinson, New York v. Belton, Arizona v. Gant(Note: Gant opinion is posted on Lexis Course Web Page) / Text, pages 209-237
Mon., June 14 / Pretextual Searches, Searches of Cars and Containers
Whren v. U.S., Chambers v. Maroney, California v. Carney, U.S. v. Chadwick / Text, pages 244-277
Wed., June 16 / The Terry Doctrine and Reasonable Suspicion
Terry v. Ohio, Dunaway v. New York, Illinois v. Wardlow / Text, pages 338-363, 394-399
1