Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
20 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
The Fourth 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, an no warrents shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particulatly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized"
|
|
|
exclusionary rule
|
established that courts may not accept evidence obtained by unreasonable search and seizure, regardless of its relevance to a case.
|
|
|
Weeks v. United States (1914)
|
Made the exclusionary rule applicable at the FEDERAL LEVEL
|
|
|
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
|
Made the exclusionary rule applicable to ALL COURTS
|
|
|
Fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine
|
established that evidence obtained as a result of an earlier illegality must be excluded from trial.
|
|
|
Nix v. Williams (1984)
|
the inevitable descovery doctrine
|
|
|
Inevtable-Discovery Doctrine
|
established that if illegally obtained evidence would in all likelihood eventually have been discovered leagally, it may be used.
|
|
|
United States v. Leon (1984)
|
Police were issued a tip from a unreliable source and applied for a search warrent. This lead to reasonably good faith doctrine
|
|
|
The Good-Faith doctrine
|
established that illegally obtained evidence may be admissible if the police were truly not aware they were violating a suspect's Fourth Amendment rights.
|
|
|
A search can be justified and considered leaal if any of the following conditions are met...
|
-A search warrent has been issued
-Consent is given -an officer stops a suspicious person and believes the person may be armed. -the search is incidental to a lawful arrest -an emergency exists |
|
|
Johnson v. United States (1948)
|
Supreme Court ruled that without exigent circumstances, searches are presumptively unconstitutional if not authorised by a serach warrent
|
|
|
Probable Cause
|
Requires that a combination of facts makes it more likely than not that items sought are where the police believes them to be. It is what would lead a person of "reasonable caution" to believe that something connected with a crime is on the premises or person to be searched.
|
|
|
Aguilar v. Texas (1964)
|
(1) Is the informant reliable/credible?
(2) Is the information believable? |
|
|
Spinelli v. United States (1969)
|
Court ruled that the affidavit of the FBI for a warrant was insufficient to establish probable cause because there was not enough information to adequately assess the informant's reliability
|
|
|
Illinois v. Gates (1983)
|
The Court ruled that probable cause is a practical concept that should not be weighed by scholars using test, such as the Aguilar-Spinelli "two-pronged" test, rather the "totality-of-the-circumstances" test.
|
|
|
"Totality-of-the-Circumstances" Test
|
Refers to the sum total of factors leading a reasonable person to a course of action.
|
|
|
Groh v. Ramirez (2004)
|
The Supreme Court sent a message to law enforcement on the importance of paying attention to detail. The search warrent must contain a description of the residence to be searched.
|
|
|
Wilson v. Arkansas (1995)
|
"The underlying command of the Fourth Amendment is always that searches and seizures be reasonable, and that the common-law requirement that officers announce their identity and purpose before entering a house forms a part of the Fourth Amendment inquiry into the reasonableness of the officers' entry" (knock and announce)
|
|
|
Knock-and-Announce Rule intended to...
|
(1) to protect citizens' right to privacy
(2) to reduce risk of possible violence to police and residence occupants (3) to prevent needless destruction of private property |
|
|
No-Knock Warrant
|
may be issued if evidence may be easily destroyed or if there is advance knowledge of explosives or other specific danger to an officer
|
