Transcript Criminal Justice Process: The Investigation

Criminal Justice
Process:
The Investigation
1.
2.
3.
The Arrest
Search and Seizure
Interrogations and Confessions
The Arrest –

Arrest Warrant:

Warrantless Arrest:
When a person suspected of a crime is taken into custody
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.
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.
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



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, Lonnie’s
car, speeding away from the school.
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?
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 officer’s
name and badge number
Give your name, address, and phone number to the police
Do not discuss your case with anyone and don’t 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
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



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 Harris’s 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.
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
Search and Seizure

4th 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
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)
Search and Seizure????
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
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.
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.
Jill’s ex-boyfriend breaks into her apartment and looks through her desk
for love letters. Instead he finds drugs, which he gives to the police.
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.
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 Sandi’s dresser
Search and Seizure (4th Amendment)




Americans value their privacy and expect to be left alone, especially
in their homes
No “right to privacy” in the Constitution, but the 4th 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 government’s 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)
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”
Elements of a Warrant
1)
2)
Swear an Oath or Affirmation before a
judge or magistrate
Show PROBABLE CAUSE
1)
2)
3)
Reasons for the search
Evidence against that person
Specifically list WHO/WHAT/WHERE to
be searched

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
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
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.
Public School Searches



Students as public schools have 4th 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 school’s legitimate interests (IE – Drug
Problem)


Probable Cause vs. Reasonable Suspicion
Do you have a 4th Amendment Right?






Your Backpack
Your Locker
Your car
On your person
Student Drug Testing (book assignment p. 147)
T.L.O. case
Book Assignment (read p. 147)
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
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?
What are the most convincing arguments challenging the policy for
the students?
What are the most convincing arguments in justifying the policy for
the school?
How should the case be decided? Explain
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
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
Determine whether profiling was used in
making each of the following decisions. Give
your reasons
1.
2.
3.
4.
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.
After a terrorist attack, the government decides to use more telephone
wiretaps to gather information in communities that have mosques.
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 men’s 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.
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
Interrogations and Confessions






Interrogation: questioning the accused after arrest that often lead to
confessions or admissions of guilt
5th 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’)
6th 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-where’s the gun)
Escobedo 1964: cannot use confession if request for an attorney is denied
Constant balance between the rights of the individual and the government’s
need to protect society from crime
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?