Select Page

Criminal Procedure
Villanova University School of Law
Chanenson, Steven L.

I. Arrest Search and Seizure: Fourth Amendement
 
“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 searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
 
A. The Exclusionary Rule
 
1.       Exclusionary Rule – Any evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment is ordinarily inadmissible in a criminal trial
 
(a)    Wolf v. Colorado – exclusionary rule is not applied to the states through the 14th amendment. Rather, Protection against arbitrary intrusion is required
 
(b)   Mapp v. Ohio – Overturned Wolf because assurance against…state invasion of privacy would be…ephemeral, and because every other remedy failed to ensure the protection granted by the 4th and 14th amendments.
 
B. Was there a search?
 
1.  A person, not just a place, is protected under 4th amendment. Thus, no physical intrusion is necessary to constitute a search
 
(a)    Katz v. U.S. – D went into public phone booth to make a call, and . The FBI tapped the booth without any warrant. Court held it was unreasonable because one expects to get privacy in a phone booth because we close the door behind us expecting privacy, and wherever a man may be (home, hotel, motel, car, phone booth) he is entitled to know that he will remain free from unreasonable searches. In tho phone booth Katz was trying to exclude the world.
 
i.       Concurring Opinion – Firstly, a person has to have exhibited an expectation of privacy; and secondly, that expectation must be justified by society.
           
2.      D must have expected and society must accept that it is a justified expectation of privacy in order for there to be a search
 
(a)    CA v. Greenwood  – Police searched trash of a person left on the curp for pickup. Court held that although D expected privacy, society wont justify the expectation because On their particular block, it is common for strangers to scavenge trash. Moreover, trash is left at the curb for the purpose that it would be collected by the garbage ma

a search because the information could not have been otherwise obtained unless through physical intrusion, and it is not commonly used.
 
B. Reasonableness of the Search
 
1.      Getting Probable Cause for a Warrant
 
(a) The Search Warrants must be supported by probable cause. Probable cause must be taken in totality of circumstances (considering Aguilar-Spinelli factors in some jurisdictions which are (1) Basis of Knowledge, and (2) Veracitywhich is (a) Credibility and (b) Reliability – If someone does not have background credibility then we can’t get a tip from him.)
 
Spinelli v. U.S. – Informant claimed that D was a bookie. Police claimed he was seen traveling to Missouri, that he had 2 registered phone numbers, and D known as gambling associate. Court held that the warrant unconstitutional because the informants tip was unreliable and the tip didn’t describe the