1 / 5

Ch. 3-3 The Exclusionary Rule, The Plain View Doctrine and Stop & Frisk

Lesson Objectives. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution. Ch. 3-3 The Exclusionary Rule, The Plain View Doctrine and Stop & Frisk. Analyze The Exclusionary Rule Define the Good Faith Exception to Exclusionary Rule

loni
Download Presentation

Ch. 3-3 The Exclusionary Rule, The Plain View Doctrine and Stop & Frisk

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Lesson Objectives BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3:Criminal Procedure and the Constitution Ch. 3-3 The Exclusionary Rule, The Plain View Doctrine and Stop & Frisk Analyze The Exclusionary Rule Define the Good Faith Exception to Exclusionary Rule Examine the Plain View Doctrine and determine when it applies Analyze the basis for the stop and frisk rule

  2. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3:Criminal Procedure and the Constitution The Exclusionary Rule Weeks v. U.S. (1914) Established that evidence obtained by the police in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights can't be used against him or her in court. A defendant can enforce this rule by filing a motion to suppress evidence before trial asking the judge to rule the evidence as inadmissible.

  3. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3:Criminal Procedure and the Constitution B. The Good Faith Exception U.S. v. Leon (1984) Established a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The court ruled that if the police make an honest mistake in conducting a search, the seized evidence may still be admissible. The rational for this decision is that the exclusionary rule was designed to deter unlawful police action.

  4. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3:Criminal Procedure and the Constitution C. The Plain View Doctrine Coolidge v. New Hampshire(1971), Established the Plain View Doctrine which allows a police officer to seize evidence and contraband found in plain view during a lawful observation without a warrant. For the Plain View Doctrine to apply the three-prong Horton test requires: 1. The officer to be lawfully present at the place where the evidence can be plainly viewed, 2. The officer to have a lawful right of access to the object, and 3. The incriminating character of the object to be “immediately apparent.”

  5. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3:Criminal Procedure and the Constitution D. The Stop and Frisk Rule Terry v. Ohio, (1968) Established the Stop and Frisk Rule which permits police to perform a quick pat down search of a person’s outer clothing for weapons. This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not merely upon an officer's hunch. The rational for the stop and frisk rule is the protection of police officers.

More Related