Criminal Procedure Checklist
Fourth Amendment
- General
- The governmental search and seizure of persons, houses, papers, and effects must be reasonable
- Warrants shall have probable cause supported by oath/affirmation describing the searches and/or seizures
- Fourth Amendment applies when a government of the United States searches or seizes a person in the United States
- State action is required
- The Fourth Amendment has been incorporated through the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states
- The Federal Constitution is a floor that grants only minimal rights
- State Constitutions can grant more protection than the Federal Constitution
- Search
- Actual subjective expectation of privacy AND reasonable expectation of privacy (recognized by society as legitimate)
- Reasonable expectation of privacy
- "Plain Feel Searches" if "probing tactile examination" of property
- Thermal Detection Devices detecting heat from inside the home
- Where technology allows police to view in the home, consider the availability of the technology to the general public (eyeglasses v. night vision goggles—more available to society = less likely a search)
- No reasonable expectation of privacy
- Search in an open field is not a search UNLESS
- Curtilage—proximity to the home, enclosures, use of area within curtilage, steps taken to protect from passers-by
- Assumption of Risk
- Consensual electronic surveillance is not a search because one "assumes the risk" that another will relay communication to the police
- Where police request bank records
- Where police request pen registers
- Numbers left on pagers by callers BUT
- Owner of pager has reasonable expectation of privacy—similar to address book
- No reasonable expectation of privacy in trash UNLESS
- In the curtilage
- Public Areas
- Homeless persons have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their belongings placed on public property BUT NOT stuff on private property
- No reasonable expectation of privacy in a bathroom stall where anyone could observe from outside the stall
- No reasonable expectation of privacy under aerial surveillance UNLESS
- Overflight disturbs property
- Police dog sniffing is not a search if all it reveals is the presence of an illegal substance BUT cannot be grounds by itself for opening the container
- Seizure
- Interference with property rights
- Interference with personal freedom (Arrest)
- Forcible Stop is a seizure if individual is not "free to leave" under the circumstances
- If the individual is "free to leave" under the circumstances, it is a mere encounter
- Probable Cause
- Search: Probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime therein
- Seize: Probable cause to believe the item(s) is evidence of a crime
- Arrest: Probable cause to believe the individual is guilty of a crime
- Probable Cause for a Warrant to be Issued
- Totality of the Circumstances
- Persons giving information as basis for probable cause
- Veracity and reliability of the Information
- Citizens presumed truthful
- Officers presumed truthful
- Hearsay is O.K. unless it's the only basis for probable cause
- Police Follow-Up Investigation to corroborate information
- Neutral and detached magistrate must find a fair probability that evidence of a crime will be found/fair probability that the individual committed the crime
- Reviewing court must find a substantial basis for magistrate's conclusion that probable cause existed
- Information in the Warrant
- Place to be searched—whether the officer made a good faith effort to accurately describe the place to be searched
- Things to be seized—places that could reasonably hold the "thing" to be seized
- Execution—must be reasonable
- Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
- Issuance—Federal magistrate or state court within district
- Things Seized—contraband, property, instrumentalities, fruits of a crime
- Staleness—10-day-limit on the life of the warrant
- Daytime—Before 10:00 PM
- Copy and receipt for property seized
- Remedies—motion to return unlawfully seized property or motion to suppress
- Arrests (No Warrant to Seize Person)
- Arrests in the home require a warrant UNLESS exigent circumstances exist
- Inside the door and voluntarily opened
- Consider: Home Apartment Hotel Office Public (Warrant No warrant)
- Policy—sanctity of the home
- Felony or misdemeanorin the presence of the officer does not require a warrant
- Where there is probable cause to believe a felony has been committed, no warrant required to arrest
- Where a misdemeanor-fine only offense is committed in the presence of an officer, no warrant required to arrest
- Procedure after Warrantless Arrest (Due Process)
- Must be made within 48 hours after arrest
- If so, presumed constitutional
- must prove no delay was necessary or police tried to collect evidence within that time
- If not made within 48 hours after arrest
- Presumed unconstitutional
- Police must prove they could not give a hearing within 48 hours
- Evidence obtained within the 48 hour span is not suppressed even if the hearing was not given within 48 hours UNLESS the delay caused the evidence to be obtained
- Stop and Frisk (Terry) (No Warrant Stop Person and Search Person for Weapons)
- Stop: Reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot
- Based on a reasonably prudent officer with similar experience
- Profiling may be used to supply the "experience"
- Specific and articulable facts that justify the stop (connect experience with facts)
- Frisk: Reasonable suspicion that the individual poses a danger to the officer
- Pat down for weapons
- Stop and frisk after a tip from an informant was reasonable
- Stop and frisk after an anonymous caller was unreasonable
- Stop and frisk by officer after pulling over for a moving violation
- Reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation
- Reasonable suspicion of danger to the officer
- Encounters do not trigger the Fourth Amendment if, under the totality of the circumstances, the individual has a reasonable belief that he is free to leave
- Policy—OFFICER SAFETY
- Search Incident to Arrest (No Warrant to Search Person and Grab Area)
- First, police must have probable cause to arrest
- Generally: After an arrest, officer can search area within the arrestee's immediate physical control, or the "grab area" at the time of the arrest for protection and preserving evidence
- Officers can also secure the premises by "sweeping" the area for protection
- Automobiles: After an arrest, officers can automatically search the interior of the car
- Reachable from the interior (NOT the trunk)
- Panels IF no damage done
- Containers in the interior
- Search after issuance of a traffic ticket is NOT an automatic justification to search the interior of the car
- Search after a Patrol Stop: Once officer has probable cause to believe a person has committed a traffic offense, officer can pull the car over regardless of motive.
- Policy—Officer Safety AND Prevent Destruction of Evidence
- Plain View Doctrine (No Warrant to Seize Evidence)
- Police must be in the area lawfully AND
- Police must have probable cause to believe that the evidence in plain view is evidence of a crime
- BEFORE the evidence is seized
- Plain Touch Doctrine (No Warrant to Seize Evidence)
- Police must be lawfully conducting a stop and frisk AND
- If probable cause is established during such frisk, (the item is evidence of a crime) police may seize the article UNLESS
- The frisk is grossly intrusive
- If the item is a container, the police can seize the container but must obtain a warrant to open the container
- Automobile Exception (No Warrant to Search Car)
- Police may search the entire automobile if they have probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime in the car
- Once police have probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime in an automobile, the police can search containers in the automobile if they have probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime in the container
- Exigent Circumstances (No Warrant or Probable Cause Requirements)
- Escape: Totality of the circumstances
- Danger to the Public: adequate basis to justify the emergency situation
- Evidence
- Drugs: Totality of the circumstances
- Crime Scene: consent initial entry = no warrant when police return, must have a warrant
- Police may forbid entry into a home to preserve evidence while a warrant is obtained if done reasonably (reasonable in time and scope)
- Consent (No Warrant or Probable Cause Requirements)
- Voluntary under the totality of the circumstances
- Undercover Operations
- Consensual conversation while officer or other party is recording is NOT a search
- Scope of consent limits undercover officer's ability to search
- Inventory Searches (No Warrant or Probable Cause)
- Property (Cars, containers, or person) is lawfully taken into custody AND
- Carried out for caretaking functions pursuant to neutral guidelines or universal practice
- (1) Protection of officers; (2) Protection of owners; (3) Prevent lawsuits against police for losing property
- Containers can be searched if the purpose for the search is a caretaking function, NOT search for evidence
- Roadblocks (No Warrant or Probable Cause Requirements)
- Where police are primarily enforcing public safety, not criminal law, no warrant or probable cause requirements are necessary
- Balance government interests with private interests
- Make sure there is a police policy that takes away officer discretion to stop (ex—every third car is stopped)
- Minimize level of intrusion
- Mixed motives are permissible
- Pretextual roadblocks have been held unreasonable
- Drug checkpoint alone is unreasonable because the primary purpose is enforcing criminal law
- Administrative Searches
- Totality of the Circumstances AND
- No warrant requirement
- Balance public interests against private interests
- Special Needs Searches
- Students in public school
- Reasonable individualized suspicion
- Balance school interests with student interests
- Suspicionless Drug Testing
- Balance government interests with individual privacy
- Exclusionary Rule
- Rule—Evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment shall be excluded
- Policy—Deter police from violating the constitution
- Standing to Challenge Fourth Amendment Violations
- Search: Whether at issue had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place searched
- Totality of the circumstances
- Relationship between owner and
- Time spent at place searched
- Sleepover rule
- Seizure—Whether at issue had an individual property or possessory interests in the thing seized
- Causation (Illegal search causes the seizure of evidence OR Illegal arrest causes confession)
- But for the illegality, the evidence would not have been obtained AND
- Illegality was the proximate cause of the evidence being obtained
- Whether, considering the totality of the circumstances, the independent free will of the OR an intervening event broke the chain of causation
- Miranda warnings alone do not cure the illegality
- Exceptions (where a violation of the 4th Amendment has been established AND the illegality was the cause of the evidence being obtained)
- Independent Source Doctrine—If the search or seizure was independent from any violation of the Fourth Amendment, the evidence is admissible
- Illegality NOT used to establish probable cause for warrant
- Exception—illegality used to establish probable cause AND grossly intrusive police behavior
- Problems—opens the door to confirmatory searches BUT is not happening in practice (officers do not try to violate the Fourth Amendment)
- Inevitable Discovery Doctrine—IF the evidence would have inevitably been discovered absent the violation of the Fourth Amendment, the evidence is admissible
- Preponderance of the evidence that
- Officers would inevitably discovered the evidence linking to the crime
- Officers were already looking in the place where the evidence was
- Good Faith Exception
- Good faith, reasonable reliance, on a defective warrant issued by a neutral magistrate, the exclusionary rule does not apply
- Exceptions
- Misleading evidence
- Magistrate is not neutral
- Police submit clearly insufficient affidavit
- Warrant is facially deficient
- Policy—only apply exclusionary rule for police misconduct, not magistrates mistakes
Fifth Amendment
- General
- No person shall be compelled in a criminal case to be a witnessagainst himself
- Elements
- "Persons"
- Fifth Amendment is a personal right. One cannot rely on the Fifth Amendment for other people
- Privilege does not extend to corporations, partnerships, or other types of legal business entities EXCEPT sole proprietorships
- "Compelled"
- State's use of contempt power is compulsion because it poses substantial punishment on person who claims the privilege—presents the witness with the cruel trilemma of choosing between self-accusation, contempt, and perjury—each of which could lead to imprisonment
- "Witness against Himself"
- The Fifth Amendment protects only against compelled disclosure of testimonial evidence. If evidence is nontestimonial, the Government can compel its production
- Express or implied assertion of fact that could be true or false subjects a witness to the cruel trilemma of punishment for truth, falsity, or silence
- Witness can be compelled to produce
- DNA evidence, photo lineups, fingerprints, handwriting samples, blood, and speech comparisons IF
- Probative effect of comparisons must be the comparison, NOT the actual words spoken
- "Criminal Case"
- Prohibits the Government from compelling individuals to provide incriminating testimony in any proceeding if their answers might tend to incriminate them in an ongoing or future criminal proceeding
- Silence cannot be used as evidence against in a criminal case BUT
- Silence can be used as evidence against in a civil case
- Fact finder can draw "any reasonable inference" from the 's silence in a civil case
- "Against Himself"
- Immunity takes away the Fifth Amendment Privilege
- Transactional immunity is a complete bar to any future prosecution of the who is granted immunity
- Use immunity is not a complete bar to any future prosecution of the who is granted immunity, but bars the prosecution from using the immunized testimony against the
- Confessions And Due Process Clause
- Due process clause under the Fifth Amendment is used to exclude confessions where, under the totality of the circumstances, the involuntarily confessed
- False documentary evidence is per se impermissible
- Confessions derived from promises of consideration by the police will be excluded IF
- Police have no authority to give leniency
- The leniency is unreasonable
- Police misconduct controls, not the 's state of mind
- Confessions and Miranda
- Police must advise a suspect of his rights before custodial interrogation
- Policy—Advise every suspect of his rights, assure waiver of rights is voluntary, and put every suspect on a level playing field with the police in an inherently coercive atmosphere
- Miranda Rights
- Right to remain silent (Fifth Amendment)
- Anything said can and will be used against you in court (consequence, not a right)
- Right to the presence of an attorney during questioning
- Right to have attorney appointed if you cannot afford one (not mandatory if police know you can afford an attorney)
- Custodial Interrogation
- Custody
- Whether, under the totality of the circumstances, the suspect has been deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way (free to leave)
- Arrests generally, but NOT Terry Stops
- Interrogation
- Express questioning OR
- Functional equivalent of express questioning
- Any words or police action which the police should know is reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from THIS suspect
- Exceptions to Miranda Warnings
- Public Safety/Emergency exception applies where, under the totality of the circumstances, danger to the public outweighs the 's Fifth Amendment rights
- More compulsion is generally tolerated in such circumstances although not freely admitted by the court
- Waiver of Miranda Warnings Generally
- Knowing AND voluntary waiver of rights
- Knowing—Full awareness of nature of the right AND consequences of abandoning such right
- Voluntary—product of a free and deliberate choice
- Focus on the suspect
- Silence is not enough to constitute a valid waiver
- Waiver after invocation of Miranda Rights
- Whether, under the totality of the circumstances, the police scrupulously honored's invocation of Miranda rights
- Right to Silence—police may continue to interrogate UNTIL makes an express, unequivocal statement that the right to silence is being invoked
- Right to an Attorney—once the right to an attorney is invoked, police must stop interrogation unless the communication is initiated by the suspect
- Policy—right to an attorney is generally a higher right than the right to silence because invoking right to counsel requires additional time before it can be exercised
- Identifications
- Formal Charges—any police lineup after formal charges have been brought requires the presence and participation of counsel
- Policy—Prevent suggestive lineups
- No Formal Charges—balance the benefit to the individual in having counsel present WITH burden on society to have counsel present at this identification
- Totality of the Circumstances
- Permissible suggestiveness
- Early Identifications—fresh in witness' mind, exonerate the accused
- Independent Source—If witness is able to identify suspect without any suggestiveness and from an independent ability to identify the suspect the evidence of identification is admissible
- Photographic Identifications generally do NOT require the presence of an attorney
Sixth Amendment
- General
- In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the assistance of counsel
- The accused in felony cases have a fundamental right to counsel
- The accused in misdemeanor cases have the right to counsel IF the benefits of providing counsel outweigh the costs to society of providing counsel
- The accused in other cases will have the right to counsel IF liberty is at stake, but NOT if money is at stake
- Gives trial judge choice between appointing counsel and being free to sentence to imprisonment OR forego appointing counsel and be barred from sentencing to imprisonment
- Scope of the Right to Counsel
- Right to counsel attaches at all critical stages of the proceedings
- Right to counsel attaches to appeals as of right
- Right to counsel does not attach to discretionary appeals
- Right to counsel does not attach to sentencing proceedings unless issues of sentencing are disputed
- Right to counsel does not attach to administrative parole/probation proceedings unless the issues presented require the presence and participation of an attorney
- Right to counsel attaches in juvenile cases
- Right to use of experts attaches if competent representation would require the aid of experts
- Effective Assistance of Counsel
- Counsel must provide objectively reasonable assistance AND
- The outcome does not prejudicially effect the defendant
1