Presentation on theme: "The Fourth Amendment – Search and Seizure A.The Right to Privacy 1.People are protected only where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy 2.People."— Presentation transcript:
The Fourth Amendment – Search and Seizure A.The Right to Privacy 1.People are protected only where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy 2.People are protected from “Unreasonable” searches and seizures in their persons, places and effects 3.General Rule – All searches require a warrant, based on probable cause and describing the thing or place to searched with particularity
What is Probable Cause ? 1, Probable cause is a reasonable belief that more likely than not evidence of a crime will be found in the place or on the person to be searched. a. Probable cause is evidence. It can be based on hearsay evidence. 2. Probable cause is different than Reasonable Suspicion. Reasonable Suspicion applies only to a police officer doing a limited search of a person without a warrant when the police officer believes a crime is, was, or is about to be committed.
B.Exceptions: 1. Searches of Persons a. Students: Students may be searched without a warrant whenever the school has a good reason. (breaking a school rule) NJ v. TLO b. Searches at Airports, Government Buildings, Public Schools, National Monuments, Borders.
c. Search incident to a lawful arrest d. The Stop and Frisk: A police officer may search a person without a warrant when the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that a crime was, is, or is about to be committed.
2.Search of Homes and Places: Searches of Homes and Buildings usually always requires a warrant Except: a.Exigent Circumstances: b. Hot Pursuit: c. Plain View: A Police Officer can seize what he sees d. Outside: Outside the Curtilage e. Abandoned Property
3.Search of Automobiles: A warrant is needed to search an automobile…EXCEPT a. The traffic stop: Police can search the interior of a car, the glove compartment, and any packages within the immediate control of the driver or passengers but not the trunk. Carroll v. US B. The inventory search: If the police impound a vehicle, the may do an inventory search before giving the car back to the owner.
4.The wiretap – eavesdropping: A warrant is needed for the government to listen to your conversations. The federal government and the states have very strict laws that the police must follow in order to get a wiretap warrant. The federal warrant must be reviewed every three weeks by a judge in order to continue it. EXCEPT: a. National Security: FISA – The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Allows the government to listen to conversations between foreign nationals without a warrant. It also allows the government to listen to conversations between US citizen and foreign country for 3 days without a warrant. Established the FISA court
5.Consent searches: Once you consent to a search, no warrant is necessary. a. Who may consent: Only someone with authority over the property may consent to a search. Only an adult can give consent.
C.Warrants: A Court Order 1. The 4 th amendment requires warrants to be specific a. The warrant must be specific as to date and time b. It must identify the property to be seized specifically c. It must identify the person or place to be searched specifically d. It must be executed in a timely manner (2 days) e. It can’t be executed at night unless for an extraordinary reason f. It must be supported by an affidavit g. It must be signed by a judge h. It must be based on probable cause
D. What is the penalty if the government does a search that is in violation of the Fourth Amendment? 1. The Exclusionary Rule: If the government does a search that violates the Fourth Amendment then any evidence found may not be used at the trial of the defendant (the person charged with the crime). We say that the evidence is excluded from trial. 2. Fruit from the Poisonous Tree: In fact, if an illegal search gives the police an idea to look somewhere else (another property) then any evidence found at the second place is excluded from the trial.
Ask your self three questions: 1. Is there a reasonable expectation of privacy? 2. If so, is there a warrant? 3. If not, is there an exception?
The Exclusionary Rule Caroline’s former boyfriend (after a bad break up) breaks into Caroline’s house looking for love letters. Instead he finds drugs, which he turns over to the police. Can the drugs be used against Caroline at her trial or are they excluded from the trial?
The Exclusionary Rule After Trevor spends the night at a hotel, the police ask the maid to turn over the contents of the wastebasket and they find notes of a planned murder. Can the police use the notes at Trevor’s trial or are they excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule The police see Sierra, a known drug dealer standing on the corner. They stop and search her and find drugs in her pocket. Can the drugs be used at Sierra’s trial or are they excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule The police stop Isabel for reckless driving. After pulling over her car, the police search her purse and find an unlicensed handgun. Can the police use the gun at her trial or is it excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule Ben is observed shoplifting in a store. The police chase Ben to his front door and arrest him. A search of his apartment reveals a large quantity of stolen merchandise. Can the police use the stolen merchandise at trial or is it excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule The police suspect Ethan of receiving stolen property. The police go to his apartment and ask his roommate, Charlie, if they can search the apartment. They find stolen property in Ethan’s closet. Can they use the stolen property against Ethan at his trial or is it excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule Gabe robs the store formerly known as WAWA. The police obtain his identity from the store camera. The police know that Gabe occasionally visits Andrew. The police go to Andrew’s house and knock on the door. Gabe answers, sees the police, gets past them and runs away. After a chase down the street, the police catch Gabe. They go back and search Andrew’s house and find Gabe’s gun. Can the police introduce Gabe’s gun at his trial or is it excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule Lena kills Abby by strangling her to death. The police suspect Lena. Lena voluntarily goes to the police station to give a statement. While there the police notice a dark spot on her finger. They suspect blood. They ask to scrape her fingernails. Lena refuses. The police forcibly scrape her fingernails and find Abby’s blood. Can the police use the blood evidence at Lena’s trial or is it excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule Julia is selling drugs out of her house. An undercover police narcotics officer comes to her house to buy drugs. He leaves saying he is going to get more money. He comes back with 10 police officers. He knocks. Julia opens the door. When Julia sees the police, she tries to shut the door. The police force their way in and arrest Julia. Drugs are found in the house. Can they be used at trial or are they excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule The Police get a warrant to arrest Sara for burglary of a coin shop. They go to her home and arrest her. They ask to search her house. She refuses. They search anyway for about an hour and find many items, mostly coins. Can the coins be used at trial or are they excluded.
The Exclusionary Rule Isaiah is in jail for forgery. The police go into his cell to search for contraband. They find ripped sheets knotted together to form a rope. Isaiah is charged with destruction of state property. Can the ripped sheets be introduced at trial or are they excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule Phoebe is driving home and is involved in a motor vehicle accident that is clearly not her fault. The police suspect her of driving under the influence. They ask to take a blood sample. She refuses. They take it anyway. Can the blood evidence be used at trial or is it excluded?
The Exclusionary Rule Scott is on the school fencing team. He is ranked first in the state and is nationally ranked. The school board institutes a random drug test for all student-athletes. The test is for steroids, amphetamines, and marijuana. The school tests Scott and finds trace amounts of amphetamines in his blood. Can the blood evidence be used at Scott’s expulsion hearing or is it excluded?