This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Slide 1
Criminal Justice Process: The Investigation 1. The Arrest 2.
Search and Seizure 3. Interrogations and Confessions
Slide 2
The Arrest When a person suspected of a crime is taken into
custody Arrest Warrant: A court order commanding the person named
in it be taken into custody. Usually, the police file a complaint
with a judge/magistrate. They must swear to the facts and evidence
of the case. IF the judge believes there is sufficient evidence,
he/she will issue a WARRANT. Warrantless Arrest: If the police do
not have time to get a warrant or believe the suspect will flee or
will harm others, they can arrest that person WITHOUT a
warrant.
Slide 3
The Arrest Probable Cause: Having a reasonable belief a crime
has been committed by that person. Probable cause may be based on
less evidence than what will be needed in court to convince a jury
of guilt. Probable Cause is a judgement call by the police in a
warrantless arrest. It required more than a suspicion or hunch.
DRUG COURIER PROFILE: PROBABLE CAUSE CAN BE ESTABLISHED USING
COMMONLY HELD BELIEFS OF THE APPEARANCE OF A DRUG COURIER. THE
TYPICAL AGE, RACE, APPEARANCE, BEHAVIOR AND MANNERISM LEAD POLICE
TO BELIEVE THEY ARE GUILTY. SOME ARGUE THIS IS A FORM OF PROFILING
AND THAT THE POLICE SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH MORE PROBABLE
CAUSE CORROBORATING FACTS: IF THE POLICE CAN CORROBORATE THEIR
SUSPICIONS, THEY THEN HAVE REASONABLE CAUSE REASONABLE SUSPICION:
AN OFFICER CAN HAVE LESS THAN REASONABLE CAUSE TO STOP AND QUESTION
A PERSON (IE-IF AN OFFICER HAS A REASONABLE SUSPICION A PERSON IS
ARMED, THEY MAY STOP AND FRISK THAT PERSON) A TRAFFIC STOP IS A
FORM OF ARREST ON REASONABLE SUSPICION. THE DRIVER MUST STAY UNTIL
RELEASED BY THE OFFICER. THE OFFICER CAN CHECK IDENTIFICATION AND
REGISTRATION. THEY MAY ALSO REQUIRE ALL PASSENGERS OUT OF THE CAR
DURING THE TRAFFIC STOP
Slide 4
After an evening at the movies, Lonnie Howard and his
girlfriend, Melissa, decide to park in the empty lot behind
Briarwood Elementary School. They begin talking and start drinking
the beer they had brought with them. After several beers, the
couple is startled by the sound of breaking glass and voices from
the rear of the school. Unnoticed in their darkened car, Lonnie and
Melissa observe two men loading office furniture and electronics
equipment from the school into the back of a van. Quickly
concluding that the men must be burglars, Lonnie decides he should
leave the parking lot. He revs up his engine and roars out of the
parking lot onto Main St. Meanwhile, unknown to Lonnie and Melissa,
a silent security alarm has also alerted the local police to the
break in at the school. Responding to the alarm, Officer Vicki
Ramos heads for the school. She turns onto Main Street just in time
to see one vehicle, Lonnies car, speeding away from the
school.
Slide 5
Answer these questions.. 1. If you were Officer Ramos, what
would you do in this situation? If you were Lonnie, what would you
do? 2. If Officer Ramos chases Lonnie, will she have probable cause
to stop and arrest him? 3. How do you think Officer Ramos would act
after stopping Lonnie? How do you think Lonnie and Melissa would
act? 4. What could Lonnie and Melissa do if they were mistakenly
arrested for burglary? What could they do if they were abused or
mistreated by Officer Ramos? 5. Assume Lonnie takes a baseball bat
from the back of the car and begins to wave it after being stopped
by Officer Ramos. Would it be legal for Officer Ramos to use deadly
force?
Slide 6
What to do if you are arrested Do Not Struggle with the police
Be polite: avoid swearing & fighting, even if you believe the
police have made a mistake If you believe you have been assaulted
by the police, take down the officers name and badge number Give
your name, address, and phone number to the police Do not discuss
your case with anyone and dont sign any statements until you talk
to your lawyer If arrested for a minor offense You may be searched,
photographed and fingerprinted Call a trusted relative or friend.
Tell them where you are, what you were charged with and what your
bail is. If you are a juvenile, a parent or guardian must be
notified and there is no right to bail You may be released without
bail (unsecured bond) or with bail. You must put up money or
collateral. Ask for a receipt
Slide 7
What to do if you are arrested If arrested for a major offense
Ask a friend/relative to get a lawyer for you (one will be provided
if you cannot afford one) Before you leave the courthouse, find out
when you are due in court. NEVER BE LATE OR MISS A COURT APPEARANCE
Do Not Talk to anyone about your case except your lawyer Be honest
with your lawyer Ask the lawyer to be present at all lineups and
interrogations Most defense lawyers will recommend that you not
talk to police about the crime until you speak to a lawyer
Slide 8
In March 2009, Victor Harris, who was 19 years old, was
speeding at 73 mph on a stretch of read where the speed limit was
55 mph. A police officer activated his blue flashing lights to
signal Harris to pull over, but Harris sped away. The officer
chased Harris and radioed his dispatch for assistance. Deputy
Timothy Scott joined the pursuit along with other officers, and
most of the chase occurred on a two-lane highway. At one point,
Harris pulled into a shopping center parking lot, where he collided
with one of the patrol cars, and then continued fleeing down the
high way. Deputy Scott, now the lead pursuit vehicle, decided to
stop Harris by ramming him from behind. He sought and received
permission from his supervisor, who said Go ahead and take him out.
Scott pushed his bumper into the rear of Harriss vehicle, which ran
off the road, overturned, and crashed. Harris was badly injured in
the crash, which left him a quadriplegic. He sued Scott for
violating his Fourth Amendment rights, saying that Scott used
excessive force to seize him.
Slide 9
Answer these questions.... 1) What arguments can Harris make
that his rights were violated? 2) What arguments can Officer Scott
make that his use of force did not violate Harris rights? 3) How
should this case be decided? Explain 4) Draft a policy that the
police could use to determine when a chase is justified
Slide 10
Search and Seizure 4 th Amendment: 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
Slide 11
Exclusionary Rule Evidence found from an illegal search CANNOT
be used in a court of law Fruit of the poisonous tree Mapp v. Ohio
(1961)
Slide 12
Search and Seizure???? 1) The police see Dell standing at a bus
stop in an area known for drug dealing. They stop and search him,
finding drugs in his pocket. 2) After Brandon checks out of a
hotel, the police ask the hotel manager to turn over contents of a
wastebasket, where they find notes planning a murder. 3) Jills
ex-boyfriend breaks into her apartment and looks through her desk
for love letters. Instead he finds drugs, which he gives to the
police. 4) Pam is seen shoplifting in a store. Police chase Pam
into her apartment building and arrest her outside the closed door
of her apartment. A search of the apartment reveals a large
quantity of stolen goods. 5) Sandi is suspected of receiving stolen
goods. The police go to her house and ask Claire, her roommate, if
they can search the house. Claire gives them permission, and they
find stolen items in Sandis dresser
Slide 13
Search and Seizure ( 4 th Amendment ) Americans value their
privacy and expect to be left alone, especially in their homes No
right to privacy in the Constitution, but the 4 th Amendment
protects you from unreasonable searches and seizures. This limits
the power of the government to intrude on your life without
reasonable cause This right is balanced against the governments
need to gather information about criminal activity The Courts have
to decide what is reasonable when it come to searches and seizures
Warrantless Searches are common outside the home. As long as they
are reasonable, the Courts have upheld this practice Reasonable
Expectation of Privacy Did the person in that situation have an
expectation of privacy Exclusionary Rule If the Courts rule a
search was unreasonable, then any evidence gathered during that
search CANNOT be used against the suspect in court. (fruit of the
poisoned tree)
Slide 14
Search and Seizure (continued) Searches with a Warrant A search
warrant is a court order obtained from a judge who sees a genuine
need to search a person or place. To get a warrant, an officer must
file an AFFIDAVIT which is a sworn statement of facts and
circumstances that provides probable cause to believe a search is
justified. If a judge agrees to a warrant, the warrant must
specifically describe the person or place to be searched and the
particular things to be seized Once issued, the warrant must be
executed within a specified number of days It must be executed
during the day, unless stated otherwise on the warrant Knock and
Announce Officers must knock, announce their purpose and authority
and request admission. If the person refused, the police can then
enter without permission No Knock if the circumstances present a
treat to the officers or where evidence would likely be destroyed,
the police can enter without knock and announce
Slide 15
Elements of a Warrant 1) Swear an Oath or Affirmation before a
judge or magistrate 2) Show PROBABLE CAUSE 1) Reasons for the
search 2) Evidence against that person 3) Specifically list
WHO/WHAT/WHERE to be searched
Slide 16
When the police fail to act in good faith or in compliance with
search warrant terms, any resulting evidence will not be held
admissible in a court of law, as established by the federal
"exclusionary rule" doctrine. Good Faith : Acting with good
intentions to follow the law Compliance : Searches only where and
for what the warrant allows
Slide 17
Searches Without a Warrant Search incident to a lawful arrest:
When part of a legal arrest, a search is considered reasonable Stop
and Frisk: If an officer believes a person is behaving suspiciously
and likely to be armed Consent: When a person voluntarily agrees to
a search, a warrant is unnecessary. A parent CAN allow police to
search the property of their child, but a spouse cannot give
permission to search the house when the spouse is there and objects
Border and Airport Searches: Customs agents are authorized to
search without warrants or probable cause
Slide 18
Searches Without a Warrant Vehicle Searches: If the police have
probable cause to believe a vehicle contains contraband may search
the entire vehicle without a warrant. They CANNOT stop and search
vehicles randomly Plain View: If the object of a crime or
contraband is in plain view, the police can seize it without
warrant Hot Pursuit: The police may enter a building if they are
pursuing a suspect. They may also seize evidence found in plain
view Emergency Situations: If the police believe an emergency
exists, they may enter without a warrant (IE-bomb threat). They
also can enter a home if they believe a suspect might escape,
evidence might be destroyed or harm to others may occur.
Slide 19
Public School Searches Students as public schools have 4 th
Amendment rights US Supreme Court has granted school authorities
broad discretion to search students and their possessions in
several situations In public schools, the main concern is whether a
search is reasonable in the context of the schools legitimate
interests (IE Drug Problem) Probable Cause vs. Reasonable Suspicion
Do you have a 4 th Amendment Right? Your Backpack Your Locker Your
car On your person Student Drug Testing (book assignment p. 147)
T.L.O. case
Slide 20
Book Assignment (read p. 147) 1) How is the Tecumseh case like
the Oregon case? How is it different? How is this case similar to
and different from the New Jersey v. TLO case discussed on p. 148?
2) What are the most convincing arguments challenging the policy
for the students? 3) What are the most convincing arguments in
justifying the policy for the school? 4) How should the case be
decided? Explain 5) Assume that the case is decided in favor of the
school. Will this mean that schools can test all students. Faculty
and staff? Should schools be able to test everyone for drugs?
Explain your answer
Slide 21
Suspicionless Searches Searches considered unreasonable if
there is no INDIVIDUALIZED suspicion of wrongdoing. Exceptions:
Border Searches Airline Searches Mandatory Drug Testing (IE for
railroad workers involved in crashes) Highway Sobriety Searches (
some states have made illegal Washington state has) Racial
Profiling: The inappropriate use of race as a factor in identifying
people who may break or have broken a law. (IE-Arab looking young
male boarding an airplane) Goes against the presumption of
innocence It is inappropriate for an officer to stop an person
SOLELY because of race, ethnicity, national origin, or
religion
Slide 22
Determine whether profiling was used in making each of the
following decisions. Give your reasons 1. Two African American men
are driving over the speed limit on a highway where police know
drugs are being transported to a part of the city with a large
African American population. A police officer stops them for
speeding and then conducts a complete search of their car,
including their trunk, to look for drugs. They do not find any
drugs. 2. After a terrorist attack, the government decides to use
more telephone wiretaps to gather information in communities that
have mosques. 3. A man reports overhearing two Spanish-speaking men
in a coffee shop planning to rob a specific jewelry store the next
day. The witness could not see the mens faces and does not know
their names. The next day the police go to the store and question
two Latino-looking men who are sitting in a car outside. 4. A woman
entering the US holds a passport from a country with which the US
was recently at war. A customs agent detains her for
questioning
Slide 23
Interrogations and Confessions Interrogation: questioning the
accused after arrest that often lead to confessions or admissions
of guilt 5 th Amendment: guarantee against self-incrimination. This
means a suspect has a right to remain silent and cannot be forced
to testify against him/herself at trial Burden of Proof: In our
system, the government must prove a person is guilty of a crime
(innocent until proven guilty) 6 th Amendment: guarantee to council
or a lawyer to assist you. Confessions cannot be coerced. This
means no torture, threat or other techniques can be used to force a
confession Miranda 1966: must be read rights when arrested Public
Safety exception: police can question about public safety
(ie-wheres the gun) Escobedo 1964: cannot use confession if request
for an attorney is denied Constant balance between the rights of
the individual and the governments need to protect society from
crime
Slide 24
Miranda Warnings & Juveniles Read p. 154 and then answer
the questions below: 1) What are the strongest arguments that
Alvarado should have been given Miranda warnings at the beginning
of the questioning by the detective? 2) What are the strongest
arguments that there was no need to give Alvarado Miranda warning
in these circumstances? 3) If you were a judge on an appeals court
hearing this case, how would you analyze the issue of whether
Alvarado was in custody and being interrogated? Should his age and
experience be a factor? Explain 4) Should Alvarado have done
anything differently? Should the detective have done anything
differently?