Overview of the CJ System/Exclusionary Rule
What is the purpose of the exclusionary rule?
To deter police misconduct
Officer Deeter has arrested Xavier based on probable cause, but without a warrant. Who and where can Officer Deeter search after a valid arrest?
Officer Deeter can search Xavier and the area in his immediate control upon arrest.
When must the Miranda warnings be given?
Miranda warnings must be given when there is Custodial Interrogation – questioning initiated by law enforcement after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom
•A suspect is in custody when he is under arrest OR is in any way not free to leave
•A suspect is under interrogation when:
1.Police ask questions that tend to incriminate OR
2.Through police actions they create the “functional equivalent” of an interrogation
What are the three categories of liability for a law enforcement officers?
1. Civil Liabilities
2. Criminal Liabilities
3. Administrative Liabilities
Is a search warrant required when Police fly a helicopter in public airspace and visually observe items in a backyard?
NO. What can be seen from lawful public vantage points is not protected by the Fourth Amendment
What level of proof is required for an officer to conduct a stop and frisk?
Reasonable Suspicion
True or False
A common factor in all special needs searches is that they are initiated by police.
False
Special Needs Exceptions: These are searches that do not require a warrant or probable cause which are conducted by other public agencies:
1. Public School Searches
2. Testing for Drugs
3. Airport Searches
4. Searches of Parolees and Probationers
Even if a suspect has invoked their right to an attorney under Miranda, the police may re-interrogate the suspect if:
the suspect initiates contact with the police
What is the purpose of qualified immunity?
The purpose of qualified immunity is to protect law enforcement officers, from personal liability for actions taken while performing their official duties—as long as they did not violate “clearly established” constitutional rights that a reasonable person would have known about.
It aims to allow officials to perform their duties without fear of constant lawsuits over reasonable or split-second decisions.
Detective Rivera is investigating a human trafficking case. She suspects that key conversations occurred over Instagram DMs. She contacts Meta and asks for the content of private messages from the suspect’s account without a warrant, citing the urgency of the case. Can Meta lawfully provide the requested messages?
No, because private messages are protected communications and require a warrant.
What is Criminal Procedure?
Criminal Procedure is the process followed by the police and the courts in the apprehension and punishment of criminals
True or False
In NY Search Warrants do not expire.
False.
In NY, searches must be executed no more than ten days after the date of issuance of the warrant
In NY, searches may be executed on any day of the week from 6 AM – 9 P.M unless expressly authorized by judge.
Undercover law enforcement Officer Davis obtained a statement from Alice, with no Miranda warnings. Is this statement admissible in court? Why or why not?
The statement is admissible because Miranda only applies to interrogation in a coercive, police-dominated atmosphere.
Provide an example of Administrative Liability that can result from officer misconduct.
Internal police investigations
Reprimand
Mandatory Retraining
Counseling
Suspension, with or without pay
Loss of employment
What is the Patriot Act and why was it enacted?
The USA PATRIOT Act "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2001 – 45 days after 9/11.
If the police make an honest and reasonable error or mistake which violates the Fourth Amendment, the evidence may still be admissible under application of the ____________ exception.
the good faith exception.
- Error committed by the judge or magistrate
- Error committed by a court employee
- Police erroneously, but reasonably and honestly, believed that the information was accurate
- Police reasonably believed the person who gave authority to enter the premises had the authority
True or False
A passenger in a vehicle may not be ordered out of the vehicle by a police officer during a traffic stop unless the officer has probable cause to believe the passenger has committed a crime.
False
Once a vehicle is lawfully stopped, the officer may:
Order the driver and the passengers out of the car
During a robbery trial, the defendant’s confession was admitted into evidence. On appeal, it is revealed that the confession was coerced through threats made by law enforcement. The prosecution argues that even without the confession, the remaining evidence—surveillance footage, fingerprints on the weapon, and testimony from an eyewitness—was sufficient to convict. Under the harmless error rule, what is the court most likely to decide?
A. Reverse the conviction because all coerced confessions require automatic reversal.
B. Affirm the conviction if it finds the error did not contribute to the verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.
C. Order a new trial because a confession was used at all.
D. Suppress the evidence from the eyewitness.
Affirm the conviction if it finds the error did not contribute to the verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.
The purpose of the harmless error rule is to avoid retrying cases with constitutional violations that did not impact the verdict.
True or False. An officer is not entitled to qualified immunity if “it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.”
True
List 2 pros and 2 cons of the Patriot Act?
PROS
Ease of Surveillance
Speeds Up Investigations
Expanded Intelligence Collection
Prevent Attacks More Quickly
CONS
Lack of Effectiveness
Waste of Vital Resources
To Much Authority Given to Government
Lack of Understanding
After conducting a valid stop, Officer Pen had reasonable suspicion to frisk Smith for officer safety. Upon frisking Smith, Officer Pen felt a soft packet in Smith’s left jeans pocket. Officer Pen then squeezed the packet and then realized it was cocaine. Officer Pen arrested Smith for possession of cocaine. During trial, Smith’s lawyer files a motion to suppress the cocaine seized from Smith. You are the judge will you admit or exclude the evidence? Why or why not.
Not admit the cocaine against Smith because Officer Pen went beyond a valid frisk.
An officer makes a valid stop of an automobile and wants to ask the driver questions about his travel plans and what is in the vehicle. Are these questions valid without Miranda? Why or Why Not?
The questions are valid. The Supreme Court has said that the roadside questioning of a motorist pursuant to a routine traffic stop (provided it is not an arrest) does not constitute custodial interrogation and therefore does not require the Miranda warnings.
During questioning for a DUI-related accident, police read Malcolm his Miranda rights. Malcolm, visibly intoxicated and slurring his speech, agreed to talk. He made several incriminating statements before passing out. You are the judge, will you admit these statements in court? Why or why not?
No, because intoxication may prevent a knowing and voluntary waiver.
Officer Harris, a member of the police force in Kansas, violated a court order by refusing to arrest Frank, a husband against whom a restraining order had been issued by the court. Officer Harris’s refusal resulted in serious injury to Frank’s wife and daughter. A case is brought against Officer Harris alleging a violation of Section 1983 (federal law) Will Officer Harris be liable? Why or Why not?
Officer Harris will not be held liable.
To succeed under § 1983, a plaintiff must show:
The defendant acted under color of state law, and
The defendant’s actions deprived the plaintiff of a clearly established constitutional right.
However, the qualified immunity doctrine shields government officials from civil liability unless they violated such a clearly established right.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that individuals do not have a constitutionally protected right to the enforcement of restraining orders. Therefore, failure to arrest someone in violation of such an order does not constitute a constitutional violation under § 1983.
Officer Diaz suspects that illegal drugs are being grown inside Michael’s house. Without a warrant, she uses a thermal imaging device from a public street to detect unusually high levels of heat emanating from the walls and roof. Based on the imaging results, she later obtains a search warrant and finds an illegal marijuana grow operation. Michael files a motion to suppress the evidence. You are the judge will you grant the motion? Why or Why not?
The evidence will be excluded because using thermal imaging without a warrant constitutes an illegal search.