searches n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Searches PowerPoint Presentation


149 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Searches Chapter 2

  2. Fourth Amendment The Fourth Amendment strikes a balance between • individual liberties and • The rights of society. It forbids what type of searches and seizures? • UNREASONABLE

  3. Legal Searches A search is justified and considered legal if any of the following conditions are met: • A search warrant has been issued. • Consent is given. • An officer stops a suspicious person and believes the person may be armed. • Search is incidental to a lawful arrest. • An emergency exists.

  4. Case Law or Precedent • Aguilar v. Texas — adopted the two-prong test of reliability and believability • Spinelli v. United States — affidavit for a warrant must establish probable cause to adequately assess the informant’s reliability • Illinois v. Gates — looked at the totality of the circumstances

  5. Exclusionary Rule: Mapp v. Ohio (1963) Consent: Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973) Exigent circumstances: New York v. Quarles (1984) Garbage: California v. Greenwood (1988) Good Faith: U.S. v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) Inevitable discovery: Nix v. Williams (1984) Plain Feel: Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) Plain Smell: U.S. v. Lueck (1982) Plain-View: U.S. v. Henry (1958) Public Safety: New York v. Quarles (1984) Stop and Frisk: Terry v. Ohio (1968) Vehicles: Carroll v. U.S. (1925) Roadblocks: Brown v. Texas (1979) K-9’s: Illinois v. Caballes (2005) Key Cases or Doctrines

  6. More Doctrines • The elephant-in-a-matchbox doctrine requires that searchers consider the probable size and shape of evidence they seek. • For example, large items cannot be concealed in a tiny area. • The functional equivalent doctrine establishes that routine border searches are constitutional at places other than actual borders where travelers frequently enter or leave the country, including international airports.

  7. Searches following an arrest • Chimel v. California—search incidental to an arrest must be made simultaneously and be confined to the suspect’s “immediate control” • Maryland v. Buie—expanded the area police could immediately search to include immediately adjoining areas or a “protective sweep” • Carroll v. United States—automobiles may be searched without a warrant if probable cause is present and the car would be gone before a search warrant could be obtained

  8. “No-knock” Warrants Why would the police be allowed to use these? The knock-and-announce rule is intended: • to protect citizens’ right to privacy • to reduce risk of possible violence to police and residence occupants • to prevent needless destruction of private property.

  9. How long should police wait? How soon may police enter? • 3–5 seconds? 5–10 seconds? • Court ruled generally they should wait 30 seconds before entering Wilson v. Arkansas (1995) But . . .

  10. More on “No-Knock” Entries • In U.S. v. Banks (2003), the Supreme Court upheld the forced entry into a suspected drug dealer’s apartment 15 to 20 seconds after police knocked and announced themselves • Later, in Hudson v. Michigan (2006) they did not uphold a 3–5 second delay

  11. Search Patterns Lane-search pattern: partitions the area into lanes, using stakes and string Grid pattern: lane pattern is modified and the area is crisscrossed Circle or spiral search: begins at the center of an area with ever-widening circles Zone/sector search: area is divided up into equal squares on a map and numbered