Criminal Justice Test 2

Front 1

Terry V ohio

Back 1

Court recognized police have to take proactive stance to suspicious activity. Rules developed.

Experience (observe)

Identify as police

Makes inquiry

Percieve potential dangers

If fear of danger persists, may pat down for protection only.

Reasonable suspicion only thing needed to stop someone.

Front 2

Kolander V Lawson

Back 2

Kolander stopped repeatedly for ID. Challenged. Court said law was unconstitutional vague and outlined what kind of acts are suspicious.

Front 3

MN V Dickerson

Back 3

Dickerson patted down. Found a ball of crack in pocket. Court Linked Terry V Ohio and created a new rule, plain feel. Combined with stop and frisk. If you come across something illegal while stopping and frisking, you can take it.

Front 4

Rogers v AZ

Back 4

Men watching wrestling from afar. Officer demanded ID. They ran and patdown yielded drugs.

Court said officer needs articulable reasons to believe criminal activity is afoot, otherwise search is illegal.

Front 5

Royer V Florida

Back 5

Court stated that an arrest occurs when police deprive freedom, probable cause exists, and suspect believes they are not free to leave. Miranda rights must be then read.

Front 6

Miranda V AZ

Back 6

Convicted of kidnap and rape. Appealed on 6th amendment. "No counsel present or offered"

Court came up with the Miranda warnings. Have to go through each of the rules and have affirmation of their understanding.

Front 7

Oregon V Mathison

Back 7

Man confessed, arrested, mirandized and convicted. Appeal issued was investigatory v Accusatory type of questioning atmosphere.

Court said investigatory questions are acceptable without hearing Miranda rights. Accusatory questions need Miranda rights first.

Front 8

Brewer V Williams.

Back 8

Christian Burial speech. Violation of 5th and 6th amendment. Man cohearced into conviction because an environment of psychological torture. If charged again, they can't use what he said in squad car.

Front 9

Nix V Williams

Back 9

Expanded on Brewer V Williams. Used dead body as evidence instead of Williams Christian burial speech conffesion. Overturned by appellate court on grounds of Fruit of the poisoned tree. Supreme Court reveresed decision, created new rule. Inevitable Discovery to overule FPT. Police were already going/on track to discover evidence/body.

Front 10

Carroll V US

Back 10

Mobility affords removal or destruction of evidence so you can search without a warrant. You need probable cause to stop, like any driving violation.

Front 11

Harris V US

Back 11

Impounded vehicle. Inventory search yielded drugs. Court said it's permitted due to plain view.

Front 12

Delaware V Prouse

Back 12

Stopped without PC. Invalid in an individual case. Roadblock and checkpoints ok if a routine exists. Convicted but overturned by court because there was no probable cause for stop.

Front 13

Indianapolis V Edmund

Back 13

Roadblocks ok reaffirmed. Probable cause waived if there is random searches, plans in place. Pattern has to exist, no profiling.

Front 14

US V Ross

Back 14

Closed container in a car. Proximity to driver matters. If driver can reach into container officer can look and ask what's inside without warrent accessibility matters.

Front 15

Brown V Miss

Back 15

Physical cohersion for confession is unconstitutional, violates 5th amendment. No brutality.

Front 16

Tenn V garner

Back 16

When officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer cannot use deadly force to prevent escape unless office has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or injury to the officer or others. Violates 4th amendment without probable cause.

Front 17

Misfeasance

Back 17

Fail to perform duty properly

Front 18

Malfeasance

Back 18

Officer Performing an illegal act

Front 19

Nonfeasance

Back 19

Officer failed to perform duty at all.

Front 20

Broken windows theory

Back 20

Signs of disorder, such as a broken window, will cause more disorder, incentivise crime.

Front 21

Probable cause

Back 21

Fair probability that contraband or evidence will be found.

Front 22

Reasonable suspicion

Back 22

Specific facts or circumstances leading one to believe a crime may have or will occur

Front 23

Beyond a reasonable doubt

Back 23

Moral certainty, leaving little doubt as to the guilt of a person

Front 24

4th amendment

Back 24

Protected against unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant. Needs probable cause.

Front 25

5th amendment

Back 25

No person shall be twice out in jeopardy, not be compelled to be a witness against himself or be deprived of life, liberty, or property without die process.

Front 26

6th amendment

Back 26

Right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury. Be informed of accusations...confronted with witness. Right to assistance of counsel.

Front 27

14th amendment.

Back 27

No state shall abridge privileges of citizens, nor deprive person of LLP without die process nor deny. Equal protection of the law.

Front 28

Miranda rights (under 4th amendment)

Back 28

Right against unreasonable searches and seizures

Right against arrest without probable cause.

Front 29

Miranda rights (under fifth amendment)

Back 29

Right against self incrimination

Right against double jeopardy

Right to due process of law

Front 30

Miranda rights (Under 6th amendment)

Back 30

Right to speedy trial

Right to know charges

Right to cross examined witness

Right to a lawyer

Right to compel witnesses on ones behalf.

Front 31

Miranda rights (under 8th amendment)

Back 31

Right to reasonable trial

Right against excessive fines

Right against cruel and unusual punishments

Front 32

Miranda right (under 14th amendment)

Back 32

Applicability of constitutional rights to all citizens, regardless of state law or procedure.

Front 33

CA v acevedo

Back 33

Probable cause allows search of closed containers in trunk due to cars mobility. Maybe be overturned by judge.

Front 34

New York V Belton

Back 34

Law enforcement has ability to search driver compartment and passenger as well. Extend the chimes rule to cars, meaning they can search the area within immediate reach of the person.

Front 35

AZ v Grant

Back 35

Searches must be relevant to arrest or safety, or security of evidence. Once arrested, danger has passed and cannot search their car without probable cause.

Front 36

Davis v US

Back 36

Davis secured and car searched. Police found gun, convicted of felony possession. Conviction stands due to good faith exception, no policy culpability.

Front 37

Florida V Harris

Back 37

Dog find pills on first stop. No pills on a second stop.harros says dog unreliable. Court upholds conviction based on dogs training and record of reliability.

Front 38

Florida V Jardins

Back 38

Dog sniffing the front door for PC. It is considered a search, and this needs a warrant, because the house is fixed, so no dog can be used. No mobility issue.

Front 39

Florida V Bostick

Back 39

Warrantless suspicionless sweeps of public transport allowed of they ask permission to search, no cohersion, and do not make the search mandatory.

Front 40

Title 19

Back 40

Authorizes customs offices and other to do random searches of everything/everyone at designated checkpoints.

Front 41

Clapper V amnesty international

Back 41

You can't sue the gov over secret surveillance because since it is secret, no one can prove his or her calls were intercepted.

Front 42

Patriot act 2001

Back 42

Made it easier to intercept many forms of electronic communication

Front 43

Patriot act 2 2006

Back 43

Made permenant 14 of the original provisions. Included the combat meth Act CMA

Front 44

Patriot act 3 2011

Back 44

Roving wiretaps. Passes extension of 3 provisions. Continued expansion of the Foreign intelligence surveillance act

Front 45

Freedom act 2015

Back 45

Ends bulk collection of all records telephone and internet.

Continues days collection for "targets" and roving wiretaps for terror suspects.

Front 46

US v Carrey

Back 46

The search of an apartment does not extend to the search of a computer.

Front 47

US v Turner

Back 47

A warrantless search of a personal computer while in the defendants apartment exceeds the scope of his consent.

Front 48

Miranda rights waiver

Back 48

Waiver can be done of it is voluntary , knowing, and intelligent. Silence not a waiver.

Front 49

Miranda warnings

Back 49

Right to remain silent

Anything you say will be used against you in a court of law

You have a right to a lawyer and a lawyer present while being questioned

Lawyer will be provided if you cannot afford one before questioning.

If you answer questions now without a lawyer, you have right to stop answering at any time.