1. Amendments in Action Search and Seizure

2. The 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 person or things to be seized.” The 4 th Amendment limits police actions

3. Search and Seizure To be constitutional, a search and seizure must be reasonable under the 4th. Warrant Consent –Only UNREASONABLE search and seizure is prohibited To combat and deter illegal conduct by investigators In court, the DEFENSE has the burden of proof to show search was illegal –motions to suppress- used in less than 8% of all cases

4. Search and Seizure To be constitutional, a search and seizure must be reasonable under the 4th. –Exclusionary Rule: Weeks v. US (1914): Mapp v. Ohio (1961):

5. Reasonable Searches Search: –Majority of searches are done without warrants

6. Warrant: Warrant: written order from a judge authorizing officers to take evidence (search )/ persons (seizure) into custody –Requires probable cause that evidence of crime will be found, or that person committed a crime –Substantial evidence items are connected with criminal activity and that the item will be found in the place searched

7. Executing a Search Warrant Must be executed by the police- after they announce their purpose Without unreasonable delay Specifically describes the place to be searched –Limited to the person or place specified

8. Warrant:

9. Reasonable Searches Consent :  Must be voluntary  US v. Drayton (2002)-  Must be given by someone who has the authority

10. How much do the police know? _________________________________________________________________________________ No Hunch Suspicion Beyond a Info Reasonable Doubt Reasonable Suspicion Probable Cause Suspicious the person did it Fact pointing to particular crime Fact pointing to particular person Fact pointing to criminal activity

11. Reasonable Suspicion Reasonable suspicion: –Have minor facts a crime was committed and clues a suspect may be involved in it –Somewhat suspicious of a particular person who may have engaged in criminal activity –25% sure criminal activity is afoot

12. Stops and Reasonable Suspicion Stop: Requires reasonable suspicion Less justification is required for to detain a person (stop/ search)

13. Probable Cause Probable cause: Have substantial evidence a crime was committed and this person did it Strongly suspicious a particular person committed a particular crime 51% sure criminal activity is afoot –Not just a feeling x is “up to no good”

14. Stops and Probable Cause Probable cause Totality of circumstances: observe actions/ have evidence/ witness statements –CSI to ESTABLISH PC Requires probable cause –More justification for a search/ arrest

15. Arrests and Probable Cause Probable cause Have substantial evidence a crime was committed and this person did it Seizure: Take a person suspected of a crime into custody– not free to leave

17. Warrantless Searches- LIMITED Stop and Search/ Stop and Frisk: Terry v. Ohio (1968)-

18. Warrantless Searches- LIMITED Incident to arrest –Officers can search people and areas for weapons when an arrest is made Need reasonable suspicion person is armed and dangerous –Chimel v. CA (1969)- –reasonable search to protect the officers –PC for the arrest anyway!

19. Warrantless Searches- LIMITED In Plain View: –If police had the right to be on the premises, it is considered reasonable.

20. Warrantless Searches- LIMITED Vehicles- Auto search Basis: vehicle can be moved and evidence lost –Need PC that the car or the people are involved in a crime (car, containers, objects) search of passenger space is limited with RS –Arms length area around them (within reach) –Can seize anything in Plain View With RS, can Stop and Frisk –Can’t randomly stop Consent Cole, 178

21. Exceptionsto the Exclusionary Rule Inevitable discovery- Good faith rule- –US v. Leon –Search and seizure issues account for less than 5% of case rejections