Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Criminal Procedure2
SEACRH
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| search | protections of rights not property occurs if LE examine/ look at a thing in which a person possess a reasonable expectation of privacy |
| S: Privacy | subjective belief objective belief - openness and exclusion to 3rd, intrusiveness- hypo pub, lawful vantage point |
| No search | no search = no intrusion on reasonable expectation of privacy by LE |
| S: Property | Occurs if law enforcement intrudes on property - permanant intrusion |
| public movements | fair game- though still cant use permant intrusion |
| Search Warrants | if commiting a search, need a search warrant - need pc or pc and exigent circumstacnes |
| SW: Obtaining | Neutral and detached magistrate oath or affirmation PC Particularity |
| SW: Obtaining: Particlarity | search, seizurie, evidence rigorus- premise less rigour- evdicne - unless stolen proeprty |
| SW:People | on premises if named or all persons on premise not named - ad hoc- private v. public/ involvment |
| SW: Anticipatory warrant | Affadavit- triggering condition |
| SW: Issues | Facial challenge sub-facial challenge |
| SW: Facial | within the document - such as last of pc in affidavit exception if officer acted in good faith |
| SW: Sub-facial | Lied to create PC or as part of affadavit FRANKS Materialy- need for PC Deliberate- Knowing or reckless good faith is irrelevant |
| SW: Invalid | partial adress- issues with lack of particularity |
| SW: Tip | Tips can create PC for a SW |
| SW: Tip step one | 1st discount tip |
| SW: Tip: credibility | Aguilar- spinelli gates |
| SW:TC:AS | Two- prong test - basisi of knowlegde verasicty plus crediblity - predictive details |
| SW:TC:G-Fed | Totality of the circumstances basiss of knowledge and veracity plus crobboration of predictive details |
| Topics | physical integrity electronic survallience high tech dogs areail survalences |
| Physical integrity | DUI DNA Surgical bodily intrusion shocks the conscience |
| PI: dui | breathalyzer- allowed during arrest without a warrant Blood test - warrant prefences- exigent circumstances - destruction |
| PI:DNA | if part of booking procudre - reasonable- no warrant required |
| PI: SBI | warrant unless exigent circumstances pc sufficent for intrusion and reasonbaleness of intrusion - considering both the intrusiveness/effectiveness and medical practices/risk |
| PI: SC | Law enforcement conduct that shocks the consicne in unconstitutional - dp - 5th/14th |
| Electronic Surveillance | pen register- sent/recived, size 3rd party argument for calls, text, email, post card |
| Es: Tracking | movements of public roads - publicly observavble and okay - not unobservable information |
| PS:T:Instlation | jones- police cant install- permanantly knotts/ Karo - via a third party- even asked by police |
| Ps: pervasive surveillance | violation of reasonable expectation of privacy - 90/100 days or 12,000 data points- carpenter |
| Es: Phones | SITA- allows search of case riely - no phones - exception lockscerrne and secureing the scene |
| High tech | Kyllo - information of the interior and not gennerally in the public tsa- special needs |
| DOGS | caballes- vehicle search - legitimate stop and no additional intrusion harris- as evidicne - totality of circ Jardines - sniff near house- not front porch - curtilage |
| AAdministrative searches | PC- individualized justification Or realonable legislative or administrative stanrdar for regulation - time, area, nature |
| AS:schools | no warrant- just reasonableness scope related to inital justification - defence to schools |
| Warrantless search | |
| WS: SITA | PC for arrest - person area within immediate control - accesibel containers - inspect immediatly adjoing area - limited to places where suspects could hide weapons or evidence |
| WS:SITA:V | no per se search need- reaosnabel beleif that suspect is in close proximity to vehilce or evidence of crime within vehicle |
| WS:SITA:V: Citation Stop | no sita in a non custodial arrest - unless arrest lateer thing allwoed to order driver out of vehcile and passaners - hve pc on driver |
| WS:SITA:V: Vehcile Doctrine | Probable cause of evidence in the car - warrantless search - btu have pc |
| WS:SITA:V: vd:container doctrine | Vehilce search allows whole search - including locked containers |
| WS:VD:CD: Scope | same level of particualrity as warrant for those things constitutiong evidence underlying crime includes locked compartments and locked containers ability to sequnece- for most in vehicle |
| WS:V: Inventory search | if it is routine procedure then it is good - part of booking process of vhecile of a certain type. |
| WS: Plain View | lawful vanatge point and no intrusion by officer- not allowed to physcially tocuh items |
| PLain view doctrine | lawful vantage point , rigth to access, immediatly apperant contraband jacobeson - test allowed of item - reasonable |
| WS: Open feilds | an area with no reasonable expectation of privacy |
| WS: curtilage | Area immeditaly surrounding home and assosiated with home area of intimate activity associated with home area in whcih reasonable expectation of privacy |
| WS :c: DUNN test | Proximaty to home within an enclosure surrounding that area nature of purpose steps taken to protect area |
| WS: C: areail survallence | reasonabel, undertaken for navigable airspace, conducted in non intrusive manner, concer if high tech may lead to issue of not arial in cutalage - but by foot |
| WS: Abandonded property | 1. No reasonable expectation of privacy in garbage/ or abandionded property |
| WS: Consent | police are allwoed to ask for at anytime - no warrant of suspiscion required must be FREELY AND VOLUNTAILY - not mere aqueices or said have a warrant - no duress or coercion |
| WS:C: F v. s | federally- there is no requiremnt that suspect knows that tehy can say no states- some msut tell suspect they can refuse |
| WS:C: fv | show of force, number of officer, repertivte request, overbearing/ intimidation BOP ON OFFICER to prove |
| WS:C: Scope | AS reasonable measuered based upon consent given - consent can be retracted at anytime |
| WS:C:3RD | consenting party must have authroity of le must reasonably belive consenting person has authority - apparant |
| WS:C: 3RD-2 | two persons present - refuesla wins can inteitoanly sepreate people - but if happend okay |
| WS: exigent circumstances | Offcier has PC and needs warrant unless exigent circ |
| WS:EC:FACTORS | Gravity of underlying offense, hot pursuit, presevation of evidicne, and anything else- ad hoc |
| WS:EC: SCOPE/duration | Limited by natre of exigency duration - until exigency is over or search all possible spots |
| WS:Kncok and anounce | require even if there is a warrant exceptions- case by case, reasoanble - concenr of danger of destriction of evidicne consider- danger, futile, inhibit investigation |
| WS: Protect and serve | Exceptiosn to warrant and PC requirement see thigns via plain view and lawful vanatge point use of primary purpose test- reason for going |
| WS:PS:Public saftey doctrine | a. Reasonable basis for believing occupant is in serious or imminently threatedn |
| WS:PS: COmmunity care taking function | returne a puppy- nebohood care things |
| EXCESSIVE FORCE- | use of force allowed based on reasonableness |
| EF: Deadly Force | 2. Allowed only if a. Suspect posses immediate threat of serious boddilly harm b. To law enforcement or others i. Defednse of others |
| EF:DF: Factors | i. Armed ii. Dangerousness iii. Crime involves infliction or threat of serious bodily harm |
| EF: DF: Warning | 3. Officer using deadly force needs to issue a warning a. REQUIRED THOUGH EXCUSED LIBERALLY |
| EF:Officer conduct | v. Officer conduct is evaluated based on OBJECTIVE reasonableness – objective whren – not subjective intent 1. Officer may use reasonable force if a reasonable offcer in that situation may use force 2. Evalatued by POV of officer on the scene facts kn |
| Qualified immunity | defense to excessive force |
| QI: gov v. I | 1. Government liability only if a policy 2. Indivudla laibilty a. Only if action in contravention of clearly established constitutional right - case on point b. Applied unless i. There is a well establiheed con law ii. Need a similar case |
| QI: Effects | 1. If no case is on point then a lawsuit is dismissed a. UNLESS no reasonable officer would have acted in this manner i. Courts add in – beyond debate- all but plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law |
| QI: Theory | 1. Protect GF actions by law enforcement 2. But a. Clearly established standard now protects enfocement even if subjective bad faith i. So long as law enforcement does not violate the no reasonable officer standard 3. Practiclyy absolute |
| QI: Long term | a. QI freezes the stautus of the law i. Dismissal if no case is on point – so no new descions |
| QI: Jamison | 1. Repeadelty asked to search his car and was leaning in it a. Good claim 2. Section 1983- should not be netural help civil rigths vii. |
Created by:
Vanderhoof_