Police and the Rule of Law
Chapter 6
Introduction to Criminal Justice 2003:
A Microsoft® PowerPoint® Tool
Slides prepared by:
Larry Bassi
SUNY Brockport
© 2002 Wadsworth Publishing Co.
Fourth Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution
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 search, and the persons or things
to be seized..
Search Warrant
The search warrant is the acknowledgment
by a judge that probable cause exists for
law enforcement officers to search for or
take a person or property. In other
words, the search and seizure must be
“reasonable.”
Reasonableness
Probable Cause
Amount of facts required
to lead an officer to believe
that a crime was committed,
is being committed, or is
about to be committed, and
that the person arrested
is responsible.
Reasonableness
Articulable
facts and circumstances
Precise and specific basis for
government action sufficient for a
judge to weigh their contents and
make an independent
decision.
Reasonableness
Direct Information
Objective basis for searches
and seizures grounded on the
first-hand knowledge of
officers.
Reasonableness
Hearsay
Objective basis for
searches and seizures
grounded on knowledge of
facts or circumstances
that officers learn from
someone else.
Search Warrants, Hearsay and
Informants
• The police must prove to a judge that,
considering the “totality of the
circumstances,” an informant has
relevant and factual knowledge that a
fair probability exists that evidence of a
crime will be found in a certain place.
Exclusionary Rule
A rule created by the
Supreme Court, not the
Constitution, that excludes
illegally seized evidence
from court proceedings.
The Exclusionary Rule:
Significant Cases
• Weeks v. United States - established the
exclusionary rule for the federal court.
• Wolf v. Colorado - warned states that the
exclusionary rule may apply to them.
• Mapp v. Ohio - exclusionary rule applies to
state court actions.
Fruit of the Poisoned Tree
• Evidence that is
acquired through the
use of illegally
obtained evidence is
therefore
inadmissible in court
– (if the tree is
poisoned, then so is
its fruit)
Criticisms of the Exclusionary
Rule
!
Has allowed
guilty to go free
Has had no direct
impact on police
practices
Has not controlled
police harassment
What Should Be Done To Change
the Exclusionary Rule?
 Limit its use to substantial
violations by the police - not good
faith errors
 Strengthen internal police controls
 Allow criminal and/or civil
prosecutions against
police who violate the
rules
New Cases Weaken the
Exclusionary Rule
Slide #1
• Illinois v. Gates - anonymous letter
establishes probable cause for search
warrant
• United States v. Leon - good
faith exception based on
magistrate-issued warrant
• Illinois v. Krull - good faith exception okay
if based on a state statute
New Cases Weaken the
Exclusionary Rule
Slide #2
• Inevitable Discovery Rule - evidence that
would have been eventually found
in the same condition
• Arizona v. Youngblood - mistaken
loss of exculpating evidence
not a violation of rights
• Arizona v. Evans - good faith reliance on
apparently valid warrant is admissible
Stop and Frisk
Less than a
full blown
search.
Used to investigate
suspicious persons
and circumstances
without making an
arrest.
Stop and Frisk or Threshold
Inquiries
• Terry v. Ohio findings:
may stop and search in a limited manner
suspicious behavior is required
may not be used to harass
may not be used to conduct exploratory
searches
Three Constitutional Questions About
Arrests
What is the constitutional definition of
arrest?
If an arrest is a seizure, when is an arrest
an “unreasonable” seizure?
If the arrest is an unreasonable seizure,
what are the remedies for violations of
constitutional rights?
Example
of an
Arrest
Warrant
What Is an Arrest?
• When the officer believes that sufficient
legal evidence exists that a crime has
been or is being committed and intends to
restrain the suspect
• The officer deprives the individuals of his
or her freedom
• Suspect believes he or she is in custody
and cannot voluntarily leave
Reasonableness of Arrest
The reasonableness of an arrest
depends on:
The
objective
basis for it.
The
manner of
execution.
Searches
The poorest man may in his
cottage bid defiance to all the forces of
the crown. It may be frail; its roof may
shake; the wind may blow through it;
the storm may enter; the rain may enter;
but the King of England may not enter; all his
force dares not cross the threshold of the
ruined tenement (without a lawful warrant).
Earl of Chatham, about 1764
Searches With Warrants
Particularity
Reasonableness
Probable Cause
depends
on:
Affidavit
Probable Cause to Search
Amount of facts and
circumstances that would lead a
reasonable officer to believe that
the places or persons searched will
yield the items or persons named
in the search warrant.
Searches With Warrants
Specific degree to which a
warrant describes the places and
persons to be searched, and
things or persons to be seized.
Particularity of the Warrant
Searches With Warrants
Affidavit
A sworn statement
accompanying a warrant that
includes the list of facts and
Affidavit
circumstances supporting the
search or seizure.
Example of
a Search
Warrant
Items That Can Be Seized
With A Search Warrant
• Items that resulted from the crime
• Items that are inherently illegal for
anyone to possess
• Items that can be called “evidence” of the
crime
• Items used in committing the crime
Warrantless Searches
Warrantless searches must pass the
balancing test of reasonableness.
Some kinds of warrantless search are:
•
•
•
•
•
Searches accompanying arrests
Search of vehicles
Plain-view searches
Consent searches
Stops and frisks
Balancing Test of
Reasonableness
A test of reasonableness
in which courts look at
the facts of each case
in order to balance the
interests of the government in
enforcing the criminal law and of
individuals in maintaining their
privacy.
Warrantless Searches:
Incident to Lawful Arrest
• Legality of this type of search almost
always relates to the legality of the arrest.
• If the arrest is found invalid, then any
warrantless search made incident to it
would be considered illegal and the
evidence obtained would be excluded in
court.
Consent Searches
Search made without
probable cause or a
a warrant that is
agreed to by the
person being
searched.
To claim
your rights
you must
assert
them!
Warrantless Searches of
Automobile
• Must be based on the legal standard of
probable cause that a crime related to the
automobile has been or is being
committed.
• Police who undertake the search of a
vehicle must have reason to believe that it
contains evidence pertaining to the crime.
Plain View Searches
The right to search and seize what
officers can discover by the use of their
ordinary
senses.
Electronic Surveillance
The basic principles of law about electronic
surveillance is that wiretapping and other
devices that violate privacy are contrary to the
Fourth Amendment. As a result of technology,
such devices probably pose a greater threat to
personal privacy than physical searches. Only
narrow exceptions have been permitted by the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Miranda v. Arizona
(1966)
5th
• You have the right to remain silent.
• If you decide to make a statement, the statement can and
will be used against you in a court of law.
• You have the right to have an attorney present at the time
of the interrogation, or you will have an opportunity to
consult with an attorney.
• If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for
you by the state.
Constitutional and Ethical Questions
About Interrogations
• When do suspects get their rights against selfincrimination?
• What is an interrogation?
• How does one waive his/her right against selfincrimination?
• When, and how long, can a police officer
question someone without advising him or her
of their rights?
• What is a voluntary confession?
Voluntary Confessions
A confession is compelled under
the voluntariness test if all of the
circumstances in the case demonstrate:


Coercive actions by the police or others
who conduct the interrogation.
A causal link between the coercive
actions and the incriminating admissions
and confessions.
The Effects of Miranda
1. Little effect on number
of confessions and
convictions.
2. Forced the police to use
investigative techniques
other than confessions.
Working
around
Miranda
Identification Procedures
Photo
Arrays
are based on witnesses
viewing photographs
of possible
suspects.
Identification Procedures
Showups
identify a
suspect
without other
possible
suspects present.
Identification Procedures
Lineups
Identification procedure in
which witnesses try to identify a
suspect in a line of similar
individuals.
Racial Profiling
Racial profiling occurs when a police action
is initiated by the race, ethnicity, or
national origin of the suspect, rather than
any evidence or information that the
suspect has broken the law.