1 / 42

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

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.

beata
Download Presentation

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

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

  2. 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.

  3. Outline the four major sources that may provide probable cause.

  4. Learning Outcome 1 The Fourth Amendment contains two critical legal concepts: • Unreasonable searches and seizures • The requirement of probable cause to issue a warrant

  5. Learning Outcome 1 Reasonableness • No specific meaning for “reasonableness” exists.

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

  7. 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.

  8. 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

  9. Learning Outcome 2 • Terry v. Ohio (1968) • Sets precedent for reasonable suspicion in stop-and-frisk situations. • The “totality of the circumstances”

  10. 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.

  11. 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

  12. CAREERPREP Animal 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.

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

  14. The Difference between a Stop and an Arrest Mastering Concepts

  15. 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)

  16. 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.

  17. 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.

  18. 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.

  19. 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.”

  20. Learning Outcome 3 The 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.

  21. Learning Outcome 3 A Legitimate Privacy Interest • California v. Greenwood (1988) • Suspect does not have expectation of privacy when it comes to garbage bags.

  22. 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.

  23. 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

  24. Explain when searches can be made without a warrant.

  25. 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.

  26. Learning Outcome 4 Searches 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.

  27. 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.

  28. 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.

  29. Learning Outcome 4 • Containers within a vehicle • Supreme court has given police lots of leeway for warrantless searches of containers within a vehicle.

  30. 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

  31. Learning Outcome 4 Electronic surveillance can only be used: • If consent is given by one of the parties • Or there is a warrant authorizing the activity

  32. Learning Outcome 4 For 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

  33. Learning Outcome 4 Video and Digital Surveillance • Closed-circuit television cameras (CCTV) • Criticisms - Easily abused to invade privacy

  34. Indicate situations in which a Miranda warning is unnecessary.

  35. 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.

  36. 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.

  37. Learning Outcome 5 Miranda 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

  38. Learning Outcome 5 Miranda 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

  39. 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

  40. Learning Outcome 5 Waivers of Miranda must be knowing and voluntary. 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?

More Related