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;
53 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Search is presumptively invalid without: |
Warrant Affidavit alleging probable cause |
|
Probable Cause |
NOT a mere "hunch"
NOT based on hypertechnical facts NOT demonstrable certainty (you don't have to be right) Reasonable likelihood based upon known facts |
|
Exclusionary Rule |
Able to suppress evidence
|
|
Sufficiency of Warrants |
The affidavit must supply a "sufficient nexus" between the following:
|
|
Particularity |
Groh v. Ramirez (US S.Ct. 2004) Groh - ATF Agent Ramirez - Montana Militia Groh messed up and made a typo in the part of the search warrant where he was supposed to put what the search was for
|
|
LINK between criminal activity and place to be searched |
circumstantial evidence, reasonable inferences, sufficient connection |
|
Time - does PC exist at the time of the search |
Time lapse between information and issuance of the warrant may render the warrant stale Contrast - ongoing criminal activity described in the warrant |
|
Good Faith Exception |
Exclusionary rule does not apply when police act in good faith reliance on a defective search warrant However, no good faith where:
|
|
"No Knock Warrants" |
Permissible where there is an objectively reasonable suspicion of the following:
Warrant must state specific facts |
|
Critical inquiries for "no knock" |
|
|
Exceptions to the Search Warrant Requirement (4) |
|
|
Search incident to arrest |
|
|
What may be searched upon arrest |
Room or open area:
Not limited to pat-down search Automobile:
|
|
Area of suspect's "immediate control" may be searched |
search must be contemporaneous or immediately following arrest justified in order to:
|
|
Automobile Search |
- search incident to arrest only extends to passenger compartment - need PC/RAS for trunk search |
|
Exigent Circumstances |
|
|
Hot Pursuit of a suspect police may: |
|
|
Destruction of Evidence |
|
|
Emergency Aid |
"colorable claim" of emergency threatening life or safety of another
Must be more than "theoretical possibility" of emergency |
|
Emergency Aid requirements |
People v Allison (Colo. 2004)
People v. Pate (Colo. 2003) People v. Kluhsman (Colo. 1999) |
|
Inventory Search |
|
|
Consent |
|
|
Scope of Consent |
|
|
Consent from 3rd party - does the person have authority over the premises? |
Common authority Apparent authority |
|
Common Authority |
property jointly owned and mutually used either owner may reasonably permit inspection others assume that one of the joint owners may permit the area to be searched Examples: who pays the bills (people v. White [Colo. App. 2002]), resident v. caretaker v. owner (Peterson v. People [Colo. 1997]; People v. Mckinestry [Colo. 1993]) |
|
Apparent authority - no authority at all |
police must reasonably believe that a third person has common authority over premises belief must be fact-based and objectively reasonable must look to surrounding circumstances and make inquiry |
|
What if one co-occupant refuses search? |
search is not justified over express refusal of occupant physically present Georgie v. Randolph (USSC 2006) |
|
Plain-view Doctrine |
considered "extension" of valid search requirements: - officer must be lawfully on premises - incriminating object must be immediately apparent - officer must have lawful right of access |
|
Protective Sweep |
must have specific and articulable fact that area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on scene differs from "investigatory stop" purpose: find persons hidden who may threaten officer's safety |
|
Standing (expectation of privacy) |
the individual (challenging the search) must have an actual expectation of privacy in the property that is the subject of the seizure society must recognize the expectation as reasonable |
|
No reasonable expectation of privacy: |
|
|
Privacy in the curtilage? Factors to consider: |
|
|
3 categories of police / citizen contacts: |
|
|
Consensual Contact |
|
|
What if a person feels like they will be arrested if they refuse to cooperate? |
inherent social pressure does not make encounter non-consensual police need not tell citizen he is free to leave |
|
Deciding question: |
would a reasonable person under the circumstances believe that he or she was free to leave and/or disregard the official's request for information facts and circumstances determine this |
|
Commons sense understanding |
did the officer engage in conduct that an ordinary person would view as threatening or offensive if performed by another private citizen? |
|
"knock and talk" |
location is a relevant factor officer's intent-relevant? - only if communicated to the individual |
|
The "fine line" |
|
|
Investigatory Stop |
must be "reasonable articulable suspicion" that suspect is involved in criminal activity purpose of detention must be reasonable scope of detention must be tailored to its purpose |
|
Reasonable articulable suspicion |
suspicion based upon the totality of facts known to the officer considered in the context of the officer’s special training and experience officer may draw upon inferences and deductions from the observations |
|
Primary purpose of stop |
to determine an individual's identity and explanation of behavior through reasonable questioning |
|
Scope of detention |
reasonableness depends on circumstances use of force - handcuffs - weapons drawn |
|
The "dissipating" purpose of the stop |
look to the initial justification for the stop - People v. Reddinger (Colo. 1995) is there a continuing violation? - People v. Altman (Colo. 1977) what if officer decides not to issue citation? - People v. Ramos (Colo. 2002) |
|
Transforms into consensual encounter |
purpose of stop accomplished and no further reasonable suspicion exists would a reasonable person feel free to leave or disregard request for information? apply "fine line" factors |
|
"furtive gestures"
|
too ambiguous alone to constitute the basis for an investigatory stop
BUT combined with other objective facts may give rise to investigatory stop |
|
Protective search for weapons |
police may conduct pat-down search for weapons during investigatory stop musthave reasonable belief suspect armed and dangerous
|
|
Fleeing from police |
if aperson gives chase to police, is he considered “seized”within the meaning of the 4th Amendment? NO!seizure only occurs where: personis physically brought within control of police or whenperson yields to authority of policesowhat about evidence the suspect tosses during flight? Peoplev. McClain (Colo. 2007) |
|
Incidental contacts with drivers and passengers |
passengeris “seized” intraffic stop of driver however passengersmay be ordered to get out and separate from one another pending completion ofthe stop without individualized suspicion |
|
Anonymous tiptser |
mustprovide reliable information regarding identification as well as details thatsupport an inference of criminal behavior detailsof predictive behavior help establish that reliability |
|
Arrest |
Plain-view always applies |
|
Arrest of suspect inside home of third party |
musthave arrest warrant AND search warrant if nosearch warrant, must have reasonable basis to conclude: - thesuspect lives in the residence AND - thesuspect is present at the time the search is conducted |
|
Where does PC come from? |
policeofficer observation - fellowofficer rule identifiablewitnesses - presumedreliable anonymoustips - mustbe verified |