42
CJ © 2011 Cengage Learning Chapter 7 Chapter 7 Police and the Police and the Constitution: Constitution: The Rules of Law The Rules of Law Enforcement Enforcement

Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution: The Rules of Law Enforcement

  • Upload
    beata

  • View
    73

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution: The Rules of Law Enforcement. Learning Outcomes. LO1:Outline the four major sources that may provide probable causes. LO2:Distinguish between a stop and a frisk, and indicate the importance of the case Terry v. Ohio. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

CJ

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Chapter 7Chapter 7

Police and the Police and the Constitution: Constitution:

The Rules of Law The Rules of Law EnforcementEnforcement

Page 2: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcomes

LO1:Outline the four major sources that may provide probable causes.

LO2:Distinguish between a stop and a frisk, and indicate the importance of the case Terry v. Ohio.

LO3:List the four elements that must be present for an arrest to take place.

LO4:Explain when searches can be made without a warrant.

LO5:Indicate situations in which a Miranda warning is unnecessary.

Page 3: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

1LO

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Outline the four major sources that may provide

probable cause.

Page 4: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 1

The Fourth Amendment contains two critical legal concepts:

• Unreasonable searches and seizures

• The requirement of probable cause to issue a warrant

Page 5: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Page 6: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 1Reasonableness

• No specific meaning for “reasonableness” exists.

Page 7: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 1Sources of Probable Cause:• Personal observation• Information• Evidence • Association

Page 8: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 1

The Probable Cause Framework

• Probable cause provides a framework that limits the situations in which police offices can make arrests.

• Once an arrest is made, the arresting officer must prove to a judge that probable cause existed.

Page 9: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 1

The Exclusionary Rule:• Prohibits the use of illegally obtained

evidence

The Fruit of the Poisoned Tree:• Evidence obtained through illegally

obtained evidence is also inadmissible

Page 10: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 2• Terry v. Ohio (1968)

– Sets precedent for reasonable suspicion in stop-and-frisk situations.

• The “totality of the circumstances”

Page 11: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 2

A stop is the brief detention of a person by the police for questioning. A stop requires reasonable suspicion.

A frisk is a pat-down or minimal search by police to discover weapons. It is conducted for the protection of the officer.

Page 12: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 2

The elements of arrest: • The intent to arrest• The authority to arrest• Seizure or detention• The understanding of a person that

they have been arrested

Page 13: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

CAREERPREPAnimal Control Officer

Job Description:Work to protect stray, injured, abused, and unwanted animals.

This includes rescuing the animals, aiding in the prosecution of individuals who abused them, and providing impounded animals with humane care.

Educate the public about overpopulation and responsible pet ownership.

What Kind of Training Is Required ?On-the-job training is a common condition for entry-level

positions in this field.Desirable backgrounds include an associates degree or study in

law enforcement, criminology, animal behavior, and/or veterinary technology.

Annual Salary Range?$13,236–$44,149

For additional information, visit: www.nacanet.org.

Page 14: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

3LO

© 2011 Cengage Learning

List the four elements that must be present for an arrest to take place.

Page 15: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Mastering Concepts

The Difference between a Stop and an Arrest

Page 16: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

Arrests with a warrant:• Officers are required to knock,

announce their identity and their purpose. – Wilson v. Arkansas (1967)– Hudson v. Michigan (2006)

Page 17: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

Arrests with a warrant:• Under certain exigent circumstances

officers do not need to announce themselves:– The suspect is armed and poses a threat of

violence. – Evidence is being destroyed.– A felony is in progress.

Page 18: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

Arrests with a warrant:• The Waiting Period - Hudson v.

Michigan (2006)– Police are required to wait a

reasonable amount of time after knocking and announcing.

Page 19: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

Arrests without a warrant: The arrest is committed in the presence

of the officer. The officer has knowledge a crime was

committed and probable cause to believe the crime was committed by a particular person.

Page 20: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

The role of privacy in searches:• Search

– A governmental intrusion on a citizen’s reasonable expectation of privacy.

• Katz v. United States (1967)– Established “reasonable

expectation of privacy.”

Page 21: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3The role of privacy in searches:• Two-pronged test for person’s

expectations of privacy:– The individual must prove that he or

she expected privacy. – Society must recognize that

expectation as reasonable.

Page 22: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

A Legitimate Privacy Interest• California v. Greenwood (1988)

– Suspect does not have expectation of privacy when it comes to garbage bags.

Page 23: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

Search warrants must demonstrate:– Information showing probable cause

that a crime has been or will be committed.

– Specific information on the premises to be searched, the suspects to be found and the illegal activities taking place at those premises, and the items to be seized.

Page 24: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Page 25: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 3

Four categories of items that can be seized by use of a search warrant:– Items resulting from the crime, such as

stolen goods– Items that are inherently illegal for

anyone to possess– Items that can be called “evidence” of

the crime– Items used in committing the crime

Page 26: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

4LO

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Explain when searches can be made without a

warrant.

Page 27: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4

• Searches incidental to arrest – United States v. Robinson (1973)

• The need for a police office to find and confiscate any weapons a suspect may be carrying.

• The need to protect any evidence on the suspect’s person from being destroyed.

– Chimel v. California (1969)• Sets limits on warrantless searches made during an

arrest.

Page 28: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4Searches with consent• Factors for considering whether consent

is voluntary:– The age, intelligence, and physical

condition of the consenting suspects. – Any coercive behavior by the police,

such as the language used to request consent.

– The length of the questioning and its location.

Page 29: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4• Searches of automobiles

– Carroll v. United States (1925)• Law distinguishes among automobiles, homes,

and persons in questions involving police searches.

– According to Supreme Court, police do not need warrant to search automobiles or other movable vehicles.

Page 30: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4• Searches of automobiles

– Whren v. United States (1996)• “True” motivation of officers in making traffic

stops is irrelevant if they had probable cause.

– Maryland v. Wilson (1997)• Officers can order drivers and passengers out

of a car during a traffic stop.

Page 31: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4• Containers within a vehicle

– Supreme court has given police lots of leeway for warrantless searches of containers within a vehicle.

Page 32: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4

• Plain view doctrine– Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971)

• The item is positioned in the officer’s view• The officer is legally in a position to notice

the item• The discovery of the item is inadvertent• The officer immediately recognizes the

illegal nature of the item

Page 33: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4Electronic surveillance can only

be used:• If consent is given by one of

the parties• Or there is a warrant

authorizing the activity

Page 34: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4For a warrant for electronic

surveillance to be valid, it must:– Detail with particularity the

conversations that are to be overheard

– Name the suspects and the places that will be under surveillance

– Show with probable cause that a specific crime has been or will be committed

Page 35: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 4Video and Digital Surveillance• Closed-circuit television cameras

(CCTV)• Criticisms - Easily abused to invade

privacy

Page 36: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

5LO

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Indicate situations in which a Miranda warning

is unnecessary.

Page 37: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 5

You have the right to remain silent. If you give up that right, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.

You have the right to speak with an attorney and to have the attorney present during

questioning. If you so desire and cannot afford one, an attorney will be appointed for

you without charge before questioning.

Page 38: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 5

The legal basis for Miranda:– The Fifth Amendment protection

against self-incrimination.– Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

• Inherent coercion – even if a police office does not lay a hand on the suspect, the general atmosphere of an interrogation is coercive.

Page 39: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 5Miranda warning is required:• When a suspect is under custody

• Custodial interrogation:– When a suspect is under arrest or

deprived of freedom in a significant manner

Page 40: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 5Miranda is not required:• When police do not ask suspect

questions that are testimonial in nature

• When the police have not focused on a suspect and are questioning witnesses at the scene

• When a person volunteers information before being asked

Page 41: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 5

Miranda is not required:• When the suspect has given a

private statement to a friend or acquaintance

• During a stop and frisk when no arrest has been made

• During a traffic stop

Page 42: Chapter 7 Police and the Constitution:  The Rules of Law Enforcement

© 2011 Cengage Learning

Learning Outcome 5

Waivers of Miranda must be knowing andvoluntary.

To be clear, officers should ask:• Do you understand your rights as I have

read them to you?• Knowing these rights, are you willing to

another law enforcement officer or to me?