QUINCY COLLEGE
Paralegal
Studies Program
American Constitutional Law
LAW-210
Criminal Justice and the
Constitution
Unit Objectives
At the completion of this unit, students should be
able to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
List the amendments in the Bill of Rights that
provide constitutional protection in criminal cases.
Explain the importance of the Fourteenth
Amendment and the Incorporation Doctrine to the
constitutional rights of those accused of crimes.
Define the exclusionary rule.
Discuss the arguments for and against the
exclusionary rule.
Summarize the types of protections foundin the
Fourth Amendment.
Unit Objectives
(Continued)
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Summarize the types of protections found in the
Fifth Amendment.
Discuss the importance of the Miranda decision.
Summarize the protections found in the Sixth
Amendment.
Summarize the protections found in the Eighth
Amendment.
List the constitutional rights that apply to juvenile
proceedings and those rights that do not apply.
Constitutional Protection in
Criminal Cases


The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth
Amendments provide constitutional protection in
criminal cases.
These Amendments regulate police procedures,
such as searches, arrests and interrogations, as
well as criminal trials and sentencing.
The Fourteenth Amendment and
the Incorporation Doctrine


The Bill of Rights, which contains most of the
enumerated rights of those accused of crimes,
applies only to the federal government.
It is through the Fourteenth Amendment Due
Process Clause that the Supreme Court applies
these rights to state action.

This is known as the Incorporation Doctrine and
makes the Bill of Rights applicable in state criminal
cases.
Mapp v. Ohio
367 U.S. 643 (1961)

Casenotes

Issue: Search and seizure, exclusion of evidence.

Held that all evidence obtained by searches and
seizures in violation of the Federal Constitution is
inadmissable in a criminal trial in state court.
The Exclusionary Rule

The exclusionary rule, a rule created by the Supreme
Court, provides that evidence obtained in violation of
the Constitution is not admissible at trial unless it
comes within one of the stated exceptions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Good Faith exception – where warrant appears to be
valid at time of execution.
Impeachment exception – to impeach defendant
testifying on his or her own behalf.
Standing – where defendant has no personal interest in
the property searched.
Independent Source and Inevitable Discovery.
Attenuation – where link between evidence and illegal act
is remote.
The Exclusionary Rule
(Continued)

Arguments for and against the Exclusionary Rule


The main argument for the rule is that it is
necessary to protect the constitutional rights of
individuals and to deter illegal police activity.
The argument against the rule is that it often
results in guilty people going free.
The Fourth Amendment


The Fourth Amendment governs police searches
and seizures of property or persons (including
arrests and detentions).
The basic protections of the Fourth Amendment
are:
1.
All searches must be reasonable.
2.
All seizures must be reasonable.
3.
If there is a warrant, it must be based on probable
cause, signed by a neutral magistrate, and must
specifically describe the place or person to be searched
or the person or items to be seized.
Katz v. United States
389 U.S. 347 (1967)

Casenotes

Issue: Wiretapping, expectation of privacy.

Held that:


Government eavesdropping activities violated the
privacy upon which the defendant justifiably relied
while using a telephone booth and thus constituted a
“search and seizure” within the meaning of the Fourth
Amendment.
Electronic surveillance must be conducted pursuant to
a warrant procedure that is a constitutional
precondition of such methods.
Reasonableness and Probable Cause


Whether a search or seizure is reasonable depends on:
1.
The justification for the search or seizure,
2.
The manner in which it is carried out, and
3.
Whether or not a warrant is needed.
Limited searches and seizures (detentions and patdowns) may be based on rational suspicion (i.e., a
reasonable belief that a person is involved in criminal
activity – more than a hunch, but less than probable
cause).
Reasonableness and Probable Cause
(Continued)


More extensive searches and seizures require probable
cause.
Two requirements of probable cause are:
1.
2.
Law enforcement officers present sufficient facts
(generally by affidavit) to convince a judge to issue a
search warrant or an arrest warrant, and
No warrant should be issued unless it is more likely
than not that the objects sought will be found in the
place to be searched or that a crime has been
committed by the person to be arrested.
Reasonableness and Probable Cause
(Continued)

Court-created exceptions to the requirement of a
warrant are:



When the individual to be searched consents
Exigent circumstances (i.e., a sudden event that
requires immediate action; an urgent state of affairs)
Automobile searches (as long as there is probable
cause to believe the automobile contains contraband)

Airport and border searches

Search of open fields

Search of abandoned property
Whren v. United States
517 U.S. 806 (1996)

Casenotes

Issue: Automobile searches, probable cause.

Held that the temporary detention of a motorist upon
probable cause to believe that he has violated the traffic
laws does not violate the Fourth Amendment’s
prohibition against unreasonable seizures, even if a
reasonable officer would not have stopped the motorist
absent some additional law enforcement objective.
Recent Search and Seizure Cases
Kyllo v. United States,
533 U.S. 27 (2001)
Ferguson v. City of
Charleston,
532 U.S. 67 (2001)
Board of Educ. v.
Earls,
536 U.S. 822 (2002)
Use of thermal detecting devices to
investigate excessive heat produced in a
home is a search and requires a
warrant.
Drug testing of new mothers by a state
hospital to detect criminal activity, which
was reported to law enforcement, was
unreasonable.
Drug testing required by schools for
students wishing to participate in
extracurricular activities is reasonable.
The Fifth Amendment

The Fifth Amendment provides for the right not
to be forced to testify against one’s self, the
right not to be subject to double jeopardy, the
right to grand jury hearing, and a general right
of due process.
Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (1966)

Casenotes

Issue: Self-incrimination.

Held that in any custodial interrogation, police must
advise suspects of their right to remain silent and their
right to counsel.


A Miranda warning includes the fact that what the
individual says may be held against him, and that he
has the right to remain silent, to contact a lawyer, and
to have a free court-appointed lawyer.
If this warning is not given properly, no statements
made by the defendant during custody may be used by
the police or by the prosecutor in court.
Dickerson v. United States
530 U.S. 428 (2000)

Casenotes

Issue: Self-incrimination.

Held that:

Miranda and its progeny in the Supreme Court govern
the admissibility of statements, whether or not
voluntary, made during custodial interrogation in both
state and federal courts.

These precedents established a constitutional rule that
Congress cannot supersede legislatively.
The Sixth Amendment

The Sixth Amendment provides several rights
dealing with a fair trial. Included are:

Right to counsel.

Right to a speedy and public trial.



Right to an impartial jury in the district where the
crime was committed.
Right to confront witnesses.
Right to compulsory process (i.e., subpoena) to
obtain witnesses.
Gideon v. Wainwright
372 U.S. 335 (1963)

Casenotes

Issue: Right to counsel of indigent defendants.

Held that the right of an indigent defendant in a
criminal trial to have the assistance of counsel is a
fundamental right essential to a fair trial, and the
defendant’s trial and conviction without the assistance
of counsel violates the Fourteenth Amendment.

An indigent person is one who is poor - an indigent
criminal defendant is entitled to a free court-appointed
lawyer.
Wiggins v. Smith
539 U.S. 510 (2003)

Casenotes

Issue: Right to competent counsel.

Held that the defendant’s attorney’s failure to introduce
mitigating evidence at sentencing in a capital murder
case violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to
effective assistance of counsel.
Brewer v. Williams
430 U.S. 387 (1977)

Casenotes

Issue: Proceedings in which right to counsel applies.

Held that an individual against whom adversary
proceedings have commenced has a right to legal
representation when the government interrogates him.

The Supreme Court has affirmed the right to counsel in
the following types of proceedings:

Custodial interrogations

Line-ups

Pretrial proceedings

Sentencing hearings

Appeals
The Eighth Amendment

The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail
and cruel and unusual punishment.



The Eighth Amendment does not create a right to
bail, but states that it cannot be excessive.
One of the most difficult questions in interpreting this
amendment is whether the punishment must fit the
crime.
Proportionality is the term given to the concept that
the punishment for a crime must bear some
relationship to the nature or the seriousness of the
crime.
Ewing v. California
538 U.S. 11 (2003)

Casenotes

Issue: Proportionality of punishment to the crime.

Held that the sentencing of an individual to a minimum
term of 25 years for the theft of property valued at
$1,200 under a state “three strikes law” was not grossly
disproportionate under the Eighth Amendment and
served the state’s legitimate goal of deterring and
incapacitating repeat offenders.

The Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual
punishment requires that punishment for a crime cannot be
grossly disproportionate to the crime but it need not be
strictly in proportion to the offense charged.
Furman v. Georgia
408 U.S. 238 (1972)

Casenotes

Issue: The death penalty.

Held that the imposition and carrying out by a state of
the death penalty in cases involving the crimes of
murder and rape does not constitute cruel and unusual
punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth
Amendments.

Two features of death penalty statutes that are
designed to ensure that the penalty is fairly applied
are:

Bifurcated trials consisting of guilt and punishment stages.

Automatic appeals to the highest state court.
The Juvenile Justice System

With the exception of the right to bail and the
right to a jury trial, the rights afforded adult
offenders under the Constitution also apply to
juveniles accused of crimes.