Criminal Procedure Outline

Criminal Procedure
1) Incorporation –
a) Virtually all of the protections granted under the Bill of Rights are granted in equal measure against the states through the 14th Amendment
 
 
09/03/02
2) What is a search?
3) Katz – the KATZ TEST –
4) Two types of cases – show that there is no protective
i) a)
ii) b)
5) Open Fields –
a) Prior to Katz the court established an open fields rule. The court distinguishes open fields from constitutionally protected areas like houses. Police entry into open fields is not regulated by the fourth amendment. Because a person does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in an open field.
b) Oliver v US (1984)
i) Oliver complained that two state police officers trespassed on his farm to investigate reports that he was growing marijuana. Police drove past house to investigate and onto a field with a “no trespass” sign on it. The officers walked past it for about a mile where they found marijuana. The court held that the open field’s doctrine was consistent with Katz because a person does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in an open field.
ii) The intent of trespass laws is not to stop activities like observations?
iii) In Oliver the term open fields was a misnomer as applied to the area searched.
iv) Open field is open and is not the setting for the intimate activities that the 4th Amendment is intended to shelter from government interference. No trespassing signs and fences don’t bar the public from viewing and open field.
 
 
 
6) Consensual Electronic Surveillance –
a) US v White – (1971)
i) A government informer carrying a radio transmitter and engaged White in conversations. The court said that White had no reasonable expectations of privacy in the conversations. A citizen must “live in fear that every word he speaks may be transmitted or recorder to the entire world.”
7) Financial Records
a) California Bankers V. Shutlz (1974) Page. 49
 
8) Pen Register
a) Smith V. Maryland (1979)
i) Police installed a pen register device in the phone company offices. The device recorded number called by defendant from his home telephone.
(1) Court found that pen register did not constitute a search therefore no warrant of probable cause was required.
(2) A person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to 3rd parties.
(3) The fact that one has disclosed private papers to the bank for a limited purpose within the context of a confidential customer-bank relationship, does not mean that one has waived all right to the privacy of the papers.
b) US v Miller (1976)
i) Court held that 4th Amendment was not implicated by a subpoena issued to a bank to obtain depositors records
ii) Court found that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy to be protected
(1) The records were accessible to the bank therefore there is no reasonable expectation that those records would be free from government surveillance
9) Trash
a) California v. Greenwood (1988)
i) Police asked neighborhood trash collector to pick up plastic garbage bags that Greenwood left on the curb in front of his house and to turn the bags over to the police. The police found narcotics.
(1) Court found that respondents exposed their garbage to the public sufficiently to defeat their claim to 4th Amendment protection.
(a) Common knowledge that plastic garbage bags left on at the side of a public street are readily accessible to anyone. If public has access why can the police.
(i) Police cannot be reasonably expected to avert their eyes from evidence of criminal activity that could have been observed by any member of the public.
(ii) Other side – the possibility that unwelcome meddler might open the garbage does not negate the expectation of privacy in their home. Or the possibility of the police finding it.
10) Manipulation of Bags in public transit
a) US v Bond (1999)
i) Bond was a passenger of a Greyhound bus that was stopped by Border Patrol. Patrol felt a “brick like object” in someone’s bag. It was met amphetamines.
091002
Officer observation – fellow officer “ordinary” victim/witness informant (paid or anonymous)
Underlying circumstances (basis of knowledge)
Spinelli v United States
USSC 1969
1st hand observation would be enough to show underlying circumstances. Spinelli said if you have a detailed account to show he knows information. You can infer from the detail itself
Track Record – could show veracity of account
If you corroborate that can show
In order to understand if a person is telling the truth there are two tests
Are they giving to detail?
If so, are they believable or do they have a track record of lying?
 
 
Page 91
Illinois v Gates
SC – 1983
Gates were indicted for marijuana in their automobile and home.
Anonymous letter – couple making living selling drugs
 
Once you find probable cause for an individual – that person who arrest does not has to find 4th amendment rights?
 
 
 
 
 
Need notes from Tuesday Sept. 17th
Notes – 09/23/02
The screening Magistrate –
Neutral and Detached
Coolidge v. New Hampshire
Connally v. Georgia
Legal Training –
Shadwick v. City of Tampa
Warrants – Does the warrant clause provide significant protection.
Written out statement of particularity
Provide notice to individuals whose privacy is about to be violated
To apply or not apply the Warrant Clause (pg. 152)
In General Court have held that an S and S are presumptively unreasonable in the absence of a warrant based upon probable cause. However, the Court has found that the presumption of unreasonableness can be overcome in a variety of circumstances.
Arrest in public and in the Home –
Standards for a warrant-less Arrest –
Authority –
A law enforcement officer may arrest a person w/o warrant if the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the person has committed
1) A Felony
2) A misdemeanor and the officer has reasonable cause to believe that such person
a) Will not be apprehended unless immediately arrested
b) May cause injury to himself or others or damage to property unless immediately arrested
c) Misdemeanor or petty misdemeanor in the officer presence.
NOTE – Even if an arrest is permitted