Presentation on theme: "4 th, 5 th, 6 th, 7 th, 8 th Amendments. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches."— Presentation transcript:
4 th, 5 th, 6 th, 7 th, 8 th Amendments
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. The 4 th Amendment protects us against searches unless there is probable cause and a warrant for Probably cause more than bare suspicion, common sense standard Searching for illegal items or evidence Seizure of contraband Arrest or detainment ○ The 4 th is tied to the 5 th because it provides for your due process rights and prohibits self- incrimination
Probable Cause When does the 4 th Amendment apply? Search by government or government agent Can search areas in which evidence may be found Areas where an expectation of privacy is shown ○ Phone booth-yes ○ School locker-no ○ House-yes ○ Trash-no Warrant requirements Gray areas of probable cause Neutral magistrate Supporting evidence Informants Specificity very important Execution of warrant
Exceptions to the 4 th Amendment The Plain View Rule Incident to Arrest Motor Vehicle search for contraband Inventory search of impounded evidence Consent search Includes Facebook, MySpace, websites Border/Airport search Hot pursuit Emergency situation Evanescent evidence doctrine Stop and Frisk Rule (Terry pat downs)
Exclusionary Rule-evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in court Weeks v. US (1914)- exclusionary rule applied at federal level Mapp v. Ohio (1961) – exclusionary rule incorporated Mapp charged with owning obscene books even though police were looking for an urban terrorist
More 4 th Amendment cases Good Faith rule US v Leon (1985) Arizona v Evans (1995) Pat downs Terry v Ohio (1968) Plain view Harris v. US (1968) Student searches New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)
More 4 th Amendment cases Arizona v. Johnson (2009) Court ruled a police officer may search a suspect in a routine traffic stop if they believe the suspect to be armed and dangerous no reason to believe that they are committing a crime. Safford United School District No. 1 v. Redding Court is considering whether a strip search of an 8 th grade student who had the equilivant of 2 Advil pills is constitutional. (By the way, no pills were found)
No person shall be held to answer for a crime, unless on an …indictment of a grand jury, nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy …; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Grand juries determine if enough evidence exists to justify a trial and the charge Double jeopardy protects accused from being tried twice for the same crime Eminent domain-allows the government to buy private property and develop it for public use North East Mall New Dallas Cowboy stadium Highways Kelo v. City of New London (2005)
5 th Amendment Self-incrimination Miranda v. Arizona (1966)-the Miranda rule requires that people under arrest must be informed prior to interrogation of their due process rights, the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney ○ When does an interrogation start? ○ Do the police always have to read you your rights? You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you at interrogation time and at court.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) – Gideon is arrested for his 3 rd misdemeanor, tried and convicted after asking and being denied a lawyer Gideon files a pauper’s petition to Supreme Court which rules in his favor that all people deserve the assistance of council despite the crime Rompilla v. Beard (2005) – good counsel must be provided
6 th Amendment continued Giles v. California (2008) He killed his girlfriend who had 3 weeks prior told the police he threatened to kill her The Court sided with Giles Dissent: “This case involves a witness who, crying as she spoke, told police how her former boyfriend (the defendant) had choked her, opened a folding knife, and threatened to kill her. Three weeks later he did…The Court concludes that he may not have forfeited his [6 th Amendment] right. In my view, however, he has.”
6 th Amendment—right to impartial jury Importance of jury trials Juries are a product of our distrust of government beginning in the 1700s In Texas, you can get a jury for everything Criticism about juries is unfounded Large interests are trying to get rid of juries
8 th Amendment --excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Gregg v. Georgia (1976) Court upholds right of states to have a death penalty as long as a 2-part trial process is provided and a legislature provides standards in what crimes receive the death penalty Death must not be “cruel and unusual” What about juvenile crimes? ○ Should juveniles be put to death for adult crimes? What about white-collar crimes and blue- collar crimes?
8 th Amendment cases of interest Baze v. Rees (2008) Lethal injection is an acceptable method of capital punishment (7-2 vote) Chief Justice Roberts wrote: “Some risk of pain is inherent in any method of execution—no matter how humane—if only from the prospect of error in following the required procedure. It is clear, then, that the Constitution does not demand the avoidance of all risk of pain in carrying out executions.” Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008) Is the death penalty a permissible sentence under the 8 th Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment for the crime of child rape, when the crime did not result in the death of the victim?