1. Police & the Constitution: The Rules of Law Enforcement6
CHAPTER
Police & the Constitution: The Rules of Law Enforcement

2. The Fourth Amendment
The 4th Amendment contains two critical legal concepts:
Prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures
The requirement of probable cause to issue a warrant

3. The Fourth Amendment Reasonableness
Police must be reasonable when conducting a search or seizure
Ultimately the term “reasonable” is different in each case
No specific meaning for this term exists that applies to all case law
The concept of reasonableness is linked to probable case

4. Sources of Probable Cause
Personal observation
Personal training, observation, and expertise of police officer
Information
Received from others; must be believed to be reliable
Evidence
Police can derive probable cause based on evidence; for example in plain view
Association
Known criminal in place where criminal activity is openly taking place
Generally not adequate to establish probable cause
Learning Objective 1: Outline the four major sources that provide probable cause.

5. Discussion Question #1
In 1991 the Supreme Court ruled (County of Riverside v. McLaughlin) that a judge must determine that probable cause exists within forty- eight hours after the arrest, including weekends or holidays.
What is the logic in allowing a suspect to remain in custody for forty-eight hours without an official judicial determination of probable cause?
Note: This discussion will help students contemplate the power that law enforcement have to deprive someone of his or her freedom prior to a judge actually determining probable cause. Students should also understand the consequences of what could happen if police do not have the ability to place someone under arrest.

6. The Fourth Amendment The Exclusionary Rule:
Prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in court
Any evidence obtained by an unreasonable search or seizure cannot be used against a defendant in a criminal trial
Forces police to gather evidence correctly
Very few guilty suspects benefit from the exclusionary rule
The Fruit of the Poisoned Tree:
Evidence obtained through illegally obtained evidence is also inadmissible
Learning Objective #2: Explain the exclusionary rule and the exceptions to it.

7. Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule
Inevitable discovery
Illegally obtained evidence is admissible if police would have “inevitably” discovered it
Good Faith
Evidence acquired with a technically invalid warrant is admissible if the officer was unaware of the error
Learning Objective #2: Explain the exclusionary rule and the exceptions to it.

8. Lawful Searches and Seizures
The Role of Privacy in Searches
Understanding privacy is a crucial concept in understanding search and seizure law
A search is a governmental intrusion on a citizen’s reasonable expectation of privacy
The Supreme Court has ruled that the 4th amendment protects people, not places
Two pronged test for a person’s expectation of privacy
The individual must prove that he or she expected privacy
Society must recognize that expectation is reasonable

9. Lawful Searches and Seizures
The Role of Privacy in Searches
A legitimate Privacy Interest
Steps taken to obtain privacy must be reasonably certain to ensure privacy
Privacy and Satellite Monitoring
Technology now allows for greater levels of surveillance
Evidence gathered by a GPS device was ruled inadmissible

10. Lawful Searches and Seizures
Search and Seizure Warrants:
A search warrant is a written court order that authorizes police to search a certain area
To obtain a search warrant, law enforcement officers must provide:
Information showing probable cause that a crime has been or will be committed
Specific information on the premises to be searched, the suspects to be found and the items to be seized

11. Lawful Searches and Seizures
Particularity of Search Warrants
The warrant must describe the place to be searched and the things to be seized
A seizure is the taking of a person or property in response to a suspected violation of the law
Places a heavy burden on law enforcement in preparing an affidavit
A written statement of facts
Reasonableness During a Search and Seizure
Officers are restricted in where they can look based on the items they are looking for

12. Lawful Searches and Seizures
Four categories of items that can be seized by use of a search warrant:
Items that resulted from a crime
Items that are inherently illegal for anyone to possess
Items that can be called “evidence” of a crime
Items used in committing the crime

13. Searches and Seizures Without a Warrant
Searches incidental to arrest
These searches are necessary because:
The officer’s need to confiscate any weapons the suspect may be carrying
The need to protect any evidence on the suspect’s person from being destroyed
May only search the area within the suspect’s “immediate control”
Also known as the “arm’s reach doctrine”
Learning Objective #3: Explain when searches can be made without a warrant.

14. Searches and Seizures Without a Warrant
Searches with consent
Second most common type of warrantless search
Civilian voluntarily consents to the search of their person, home, or belongings
Police don’t need reasonable suspicion/probable cause
Factors to consider:
The age, intelligence, and physical condition of the suspect
Coercive behavior of the police
The length of questioning and its location
Learning Objective #3: Explain when searches can be made without a warrant.

15. Discussion Question #2
As discussed earlier, when someone consents to a search they are waiving their 4th Amendment protection
There has been a lot of case law and discussion of what is required to obtain consent to search
To date, police officers are allowed to lie to suspects in order to gain consent to search
What are the pros and cons associated with the courts allowing police officers to lie to suspects in order to obtain consent to search?

16. Searches and Seizures Without a Warrant
Recent Developments
Digital devices on the border
Search of electronic devices is comprehensive and intrusive
Blood used as evidence in drunk driving cases
The fact that alcohol can leave the bloodstream is not enough for the police to take blood without consent or a warrant
Cell phone location data
Law enforcement can access records of cell phone locations without a warrant to trace the movement of suspects
Learning Objective #3: Explain when searches can be made without a warrant.

17. Searches and Seizures Without a Warrant
Searches of automobiles
People in a vehicle do not have the same reasonable expectation of privacy as they would have if they were in their places of residence
Warrantless searches of automobiles
Allowed if the person being arrested is close enough to the car to grab or destroy evidence or a weapon inside the car
The arresting officer reasonably believes that the car contains evidence pertinent to the same crime for which the arrest took place
Pretextual Stops
As long as an officer has probable cause to believe that a traffic law has been broken, the “true” motivation for the stop is irrelevant
Learning Objective #3: Explain when searches can be made without a warrant.

18. Plain View Doctrine Warrantless seizures of items are allowed if:
The item is positioned in the officer’s view
The officer is legally in a position to notice the item
The discovery of an item is inadvertent
The officer immediately recognizes the illegal nature of the item
Advancements in technology raises issues in regard to plain view principles
Learning Objective #4: Describe the plain view doctrine, and indicate one of its limitations.

19. Lawful Searches and Seizures
Electronic surveillance (wiretaps/hidden microphones) can only be used:
If consent is given by one of the parties
Or there is a warrant authorizing the activity and:
Detail with particularity the conversations that are to be overheard
Names the suspects and the places that will be under surveillance
Shows probable cause that a crime has been or will be committed
Force Multiplying
Devices that allow law enforcement agencies to expand their capabilities with a significant increase in personnel

20. Homeland Security and the Fourth Amendment
How much privacy are we willing to sacrifice for homeland security?
The Patriot Act and Search Warrants
No proof of criminal activity needs to be provided to obtain warrants for terrorism investigations
The Patriot Act and Surveillance
Gives law enforcement officers more leeway when conducting surveillance
The NSA and Surveillance
Collected telephone records of millions of Americans not suspected of terrorism
Collected s, internet phone calls, social networking data of foreign terrorist suspects

21. Stops and Frisks Stops and Frisks are governed by:
Defining reasonable suspicion
In Terry v. Ohio (1968) the court ruled that when police have reasonable cause to believe a suspect is armed and dangerous, an investigatory stop and brief frisk are permissible
Police Discretion
Because of their practical experience, law enforcement officers are in a unique position to make inferences
The “totality of the circumstances”
Since the Terry case the courts have decided that officers can now use this test to determine reasonable suspicion
Learning Objective 5: Distinguish between a stop and a frisk, and indicate the importance of the case Terry v. Ohio.

22. Stops and Frisks Stop Frisk
The brief detention of a person by the police for questioning
A stop requires reasonable suspicion
Frisk
A pat-down or minimal search by police to discover weapons
It is conducted for the protection of the officer
Learning Objective 5: Distinguish between a stop and a frisk, and indicate the importance of the case Terry v. Ohio.

23. Stops and Frisks Race and Reasonable Suspicion
According to the law, a person’s race or ethnicity alone cannot provide reasonable suspicion for stops and frisks
At times these factors do play a role
Racial Profiling
The practice of targeting people for police action based solely on their race, ethnicity, or national origin
Can be remedied by a civil lawsuit against the agency or policies designed to stop the practice
Stop and Frisk and the NYPD
83% of all stops by the NYPD between 2004 and involved African Americans or Hispanics despite these two groups only making up about half the city’s residents

24. Arrests A stop and frisk may lead to an arrest The elements of arrest:
Act of apprehending a suspect for the purpose of detaining him or her on a criminal charge
An arrest takes place based on actions of the officer and the perception of the suspect
The elements of arrest:
The intent to arrest
The authority to arrest
Seizure or detention
The understanding of a person that they have been arrested
Learning Objective 6: List the four elements that must be present for an arrest to take place.

25. The Difference Between a Stop and an Arrest

26. Arrests Arrests with a warrant:
Officers have established probable cause and obtained a warrant
Includes the name of the person suspected and the crime he or she is suspected of having committed
Officers are required to knock and announce their presence
Under certain exigent circumstances officers do not need to announce themselves if:
The suspect is armed and dangerous
Evidence is being destroyed
A felony is in progress
The waiting period

27. Arrests Arrests Without a Warrant
The offense is committed in the presence of the officer
The officer has probable cause to believe the crime was committed by a particular suspect
The time lost in obtaining a warrant would allow the suspect to escape or destroy evidence, and the officer has probable cause to make an arrest

28. Discussion Question #3
An example of a force multiplier is closed-circuit television surveillance (CCTV)
CCTV includes strategically placed video cameras to record and transmit all activities in a targeted area
Imagine your city just installed hundreds of these CCTVs in your neighborhood
What are the pros associated with this installation?
What are the cons associated with this installation?

29. The Interrogation Process and Miranda
The legal basis for Miranda
5th Amendment and protection from inherent coercion
Suspects need protection from coercion
The use of physical force or mental intimidation to compel a person to do something against his or her will
Miranda warning is required when:
A suspect is in custody
Arrest or when a reasonable person would not feel free to leave
Custodial interrogation
Learning Objective #7: Explain why the U.S. Supreme Court established the Miranda warnings.

30. The Interrogation Process and Miranda
The Miranda warning is not required when:
Police ask suspects non-testimonial questions
Police question witnesses at a crime scene and are not focused on a suspect
A person volunteers information before asked
The suspect gives a private statement
During a stop and frisk, when no arrest was made
During a traffic stop
Public Safety Exception
Waiving Miranda
The Future of Miranda
Voluntary Statements
Recording Confessions
Learning Objective 8: Indicate situations in which a Miranda warning is unnecessary.

31. Discussion Question #4
There is a new trend of law enforcement agencies requiring that all interrogations be video recorded.
What are the pros associated with this trend of recording confessions?
What are the cons associated with this trend of recording confessions?
Note: This discussion will help students evaluate both sides of the issue of recording confessions. Students must evaluate the benefit to law enforcement as well as the detriment this could cause in recording the confession. There are also pros and cons for the suspect in the case that students should identify.