CRIMINAL PROCEDURE THOMAS FALL 2016 OUTLINE
Genesis of modern Criminal Procedure
Brown v. Mississippi: Investigation Failures
A confession obtained by inflicting physical pain during interrogation is not admissible against the accused.
Powell v. Alabama
Several blacks were convicted of raping two white girls.
In a capital case, where the defendant is unable to employ counsel and is incapable of adequately defending himself, the Due Process Clause requires the effective counsel be appointed for him.
Need counsel at this critical point in trial.
Norms and the 4th amendment in the beginning
Boyd v. U.S.
Weeks v. United States
Police arrested W at work without a warrant. Other officers went to defendant’s house where a neighbor told them were the key was and searched his room. They seized papers and lottery tickets.
Evidence obtained in an unlawful search and seizure by agents of the federal government may not be used against the defendant in a federal prosecution.
Wolf v. Colorado: State Court
Dr. Wolf was convicted of conspiracy to commit abortion, such conviction resting in part upon evidence seized from his office.
In a prosecution in state court for a state crime, the 14th amendment does not forbid the admission of evidence obtained by an unreasonable search and seizure.
The states are free to fashion other remedies to deter violations of defendant’s due process rights as long as they do indeed provide some means of redress.
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp was arrested and later convicted of possession of obscene material when police without a search warrant forcibly entered her home pursuant to information that a bombing suspect was hiding in the dwelling.
In a prosecution in a federal or state court, the 4th amendment forbids the admission of evidence obtained by an unreasonable search and seizure.
Mysterious Fourth Amendment: What is a search
Katz v. United States
Katz was arrested for transmitting wagering information by telephone to another state; at his trial the government introduced recordings of his conversation made by attaching a listening and recording device to the outside of a phone booth.
Is the attachment of a listening device to the outside of public telephone booth a search and seizure within the meaning of the 4th amendment?
The 4th amendment protects a person from search and seizure if, under the circumstances, he has a justifiable expectation of privacy, regardless of whether an actual physical trespass occurred.
Whatever a person exposes to the public, even in his own home, is not protected by the 4th amendment, but what a person keeps private, even in a public place, may be protected.
United States v. White
A government informer carrying a concealed radio transmitter engaged in conversation with D and those conversations were simultaneously transmitted to federal narcotic agents. The agents then testified at White’s trial as to the conversations they had heard.
Does the 4th amendment protect a person from having his conversations transmitted and recorded by that associate or transmitted to a recording or listening device located elsewhere?
The 4th amendment does not protect a person from having conversations with an associate recorded by that associate or transmitted to a recording or listening device located elsewhere.
A person does not have a justifiable and constitutionally protected expectation that a person with whom he is talking will not reveal that conversation to the police.
Smith v. Maryland
Whether the installation and use of a pen register constitutes a search within the meaning of the 4th amendment mad applicable to the States through the 14th amendment?
Ruled that police must obtain a warrant based on a showing of probably cause, or qualify for an exception to the warrant requirement, to obtain tracking information through the use of a cell phone.
Conclude that article 1; paragraph 7 of the NJ Constitution protects an individual’s privacy interest in the location of his or her cell phone.
Users are reasonably entitled to expect confidentiality in the ever-increasing level of detail that cell phones can reveal about their lives.
What is a search? What is a seizure?
United States v. Jones
Whether the attachment of a GPS tracking device to an individuals vehicle, and subsequent use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movements on streets. Constitutes a search or seizure within the meaning of the 4th amendment?
Held the government’s installation of a GPS device on a target’s car and its use of that device to monitor movement constitutes a search.
United States v. Karo: What is a seizure?
Whether installation of a beeper in a container of chemicals with the consent of the original owner constitutes a seizure within the meaning of the 4th amendment when the container is delivered to a buyer having no knowledge of the presence of the beeper.
The delivery of an electronic tracking device in a container of chemicals and to a buyer without knowledge of the device does not violate the 4th amendment.
Although the monitoring of the device may have constituted a search, the mere transfer of the can to Karo did not.