Case Law 1
Terry v Ohio decided this is required for Stop and Frisk (aka Terry Frisk)
Reasonable Suspicion
When a person is under arrest;
When a person is not free to leave;
When a person is prevented from leaving for a reason other than that of a traffic stop;
When a reasonable person would feel they cannot leave.
This Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure grants the authority to arrest without a warrant.
Rule 4.1
Reasonable suspicion defined
A suspicion based on facts or circumstances which of themselves do not give rise to the probable cause requisite to justify a lawful arrest, but which give rise to more than a bare suspicion; that is, a suspicion that is reasonable as opposed to an imaginary or purely conjectural suspicion.
Evidence that supports, or is favorable to the defendant is called
Exculpatory evidence
A stop initiated for a minor traffic violation, used as a pretext to investigate unrelated criminal activity.
Pretextual Stop
What case law gave us the automobile exception.
Carroll v United States
When obtaining consent to search a vehicle, the registered owner or person in apparent control of the operation can give consent based on this Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure.
Rule 11.2
Probable Cause Defined
Facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe a crime has been committed, is being committed, or will be committed.
Evidence that indicates a persons guilt is called
Inculpatory Evidence.
This case extended the reach of Terry v Ohio to include passenger compartments of a vehicle if within reach of subject.
Michigan v Long
These two cases established authority to order the driver and passengers out of a vehicle.
Maryland v Wilson
Section (c) of this Rule of Criminal Procedure states:
•A search of a dwelling based on consent shall not be valid under this rule unless the person giving the consent was advised of the right to refuse consent.
Arkansas Rule 11.1
What is an Investigatory Stop?
What is the Exclusionary Evidence.
Evidence that cannot be used in court because it was obtained illegally.
This case determined that Police can seize contraband during a lawful pat down search, even if it's not a weapon.
This supreme court case grants the authority to search passenger containers inside of a vehicle during a lawful search.
Wyoming v Houghton
This Rule of Criminal Procedure pertaining to vehicle searches states that during a Probable Cause search of a vehicle if the officer does not find the things subject to seizure by the search, and that thing are of such size that they may be concealed on a person, the officer may search the occupants of that vehicle if they are suspected of concealing the items.
Rule 14.1
What did Graham v Conner establish?
Objective Reasonableness standard for Use of Force.
Define what constitutes a consensual encounter.
Any encounter whereas you do not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to compel identification. These persons are free to leave at any time.
This case decided that Reasonable Suspicion is required to Compel Identification
Brown v Texas
This supreme court case decided that police have the authority to search all containers, even locked, during a lawful probable cause search.
Section (a) of this Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure states;
•(a) If, at the time of the arrest, the accused is in a vehicle or in the immediate vicinity of a vehicle of which he is in apparent control, and if the circumstances of the arrest justify a reasonable belief on the part of the arresting officer that the vehicle contains things which are connected with the offense for which the arrest is made, the arresting officer may search the vehicle for such things and seize any things subject to seizure and discovered in the course of the search.
Rule 12.4
This 1995 case states that Law Enforcement must disclose all evidence to the prosecution, including evidence that may support the defense.
Kyles v Whitley
This case protects the sanctity of the home under the fourth amendment, stating that officers may not enter a home to make a warrantless arrest without exigent circumstances.
Payton v New York