Download
arizona v gant n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
ARIZONA V. GANT PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
ARIZONA V. GANT

ARIZONA V. GANT

328 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

ARIZONA V. GANT

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. ARIZONA V. GANT -If you are viewing this presentation on a Windows PC, press F5 to begin. -If you are viewing this presentation on a Mac, simultaneously press COMMAND and ENTER. -Press ENTER to continue.

  2. ARIZONA V. GANT SELF-STUDY COURSE CPL. K. S. BUCK FULTON COUNTY MARSHAL’S DEPARTMENT Press ENTER to continue

  3. Press ENTER to continue Welcome to the Arizona v. Gant Self-Study Course.

  4. IMPORTANT NOTICE!  The purpose of this course is to familiarize law enforcement officers with the U.S. Supreme Court’s (2009) decision in Arizona v. Gant. It is not a substitute for the advice of a qualified attorney.  If you are uncertain about how to apply the law in a particular situation, consult with your agency’s legal counsel. Press ENTER to continue

  5. Press ENTER to continue A STORY…

  6. ONCE UPON A TIMEIN THE WEST KNOCK AND TALK On August 25, 1999, acting on an anonymous tip that the residence at 2524 North Walnut Avenue was being used to sell drugs, Tucson police officers Griffith and Reed knocked on the front door and asked to speak to the owner. Rodney Gant answered the door and, after identifying himself, stated that he expected the owner to return later. Press ENTER to continue

  7. ONCE UPON A TIMEIN THE WEST A WARRANT AND A LICENSE SUSPENSION The officers left the residence and conducted a records check, which revealed that Mr. Gant’s driver’s license had been suspended and there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest for driving with a suspended license. Press ENTER to continue

  8. ONCE UPON A TIMEIN THE WEST UPSTANDING CITIZENS When the officers returned to the house that evening, they found a man near the back of the house and a woman in a car parked in front of it. After a third officer arrived, they arrested the man for providing a false name and the woman for possessing drug paraphernalia. Both arrestees were handcuffed and secured in separate patrol cars when Mr. Gant arrived. Press ENTER to continue

  9. ONCE UPON A TIMEIN THE WEST THE RETURN OF GANT The officers recognized his car as it entered the driveway, and Officer Griffith confirmed that Mr. Gant was the driver by shining a flashlight into the car as it drove by him. Mr. Gant parked at the end of the driveway, got out of his car, and shut the door. Officer Griffith, who was about 30 feet away, called to Mr. Gant, and they approached each other, meeting 10-to-12 feet from Mr. Gant’s car. Officer Griffith immediately arrested Mr. Gant and handcuffed him. Press ENTER to continue

  10. ONCE UPON A TIMEIN THE WEST THE THINGS YOU FIND… Because the other arrestees were secured in the only patrol cars at the scene, Officer Griffith called for backup. When two more officers arrived, they locked Mr. Gant in the backseat of their vehicle. After Mr. Gant had been handcuffed and placed in the back of a patrol car, two officers searched his car: One of them found a gun, and the other discovered a bag of cocaine in the pocket of a jacket on the backseat. Press ENTER to continue

  11. ONCE UPON A TIMEIN THE WEST MORE CHARGES Mr. Gant was charged with two additional offenses—possession of a narcotic drug for sale and possession of drug paraphernalia (i.e., the plastic bag in which the cocaine was found). Press ENTER to continue

  12. BECAUSE THE LAWSAYS WE CAN… Mr. Gant moved to suppress the evidence seized from his car on the ground that the warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment. When asked at the suppression hearing why the search was conducted, Officer Griffith responded: “Because the law says we can do it.” Press ENTER to continue

  13. -Press ENTER to continue THE QUESTION…

  14. THE QUESTION Mr. Gant was originally arrested for driving with a suspended license and for an outstanding warrant (also for driving with a suspended license). Mr. Gant was arrested outside of his car, handcuffed, and locked in the backseat of a patrol car. Once Mr. Gant was secured, the Tucson police officers searched the passenger compartment of Mr. Gant’s car. Press ENTER to continue

  15. THE QUESTION Officer Griffin believed that, under these circumstances, he was authorized to search the passenger compartment of Mr. Gant’s car as part of the search incident to the arrest. Was Officer Griffin correct? If you think that Officer Griffin was correct… click here ►  If you think that Officer Griffin was incorrect… click here ► 

  16. THE QUESTION Sorry. You must selected an answer.Click here ►  to go back so you can select an answer.

  17. A LITTLE HISTORY Before we decide whether Officer Griffin was correct, a little background on searches and seizures, in general, and searches incident to arrest, in particular, might be helpful. Press ENTER to continue

  18. A LITTLE HISTORY THE FOURTH AMENDMENT The United States Constitution provides that: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . . .” Press ENTER to continue

  19. A LITTLE HISTORY WOLF v. COLORADO The United States Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment made the Fourth Amendment applicable to the governments of individual states and to prosecutions under state law. Press ENTER to continue

  20. A LITTLE HISTORY KATZ v. UNITED STATES The Supreme Court declared that, based on the Fourth Amendment, a search without a warrant conducted by a government agent (including a law enforcement officer) is unconstitutional unless the search falls within the “few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions [to the requirement for a warrant].” Press ENTER to continue

  21. A LITTLE HISTORY WEEKS v. UNITED STATES The Supreme Court acknowledged that a search incident to a lawful arrest is an exception to the requirement for a warrant. Press ENTER to continue

  22. A LITTLE HISTORY UNITED STATES v. ROBINSON The Supreme Court concluded that the justifications for the search incident to arrest exception are officer safety and preservation of evidence. The officer safety justification rests on the need to disarm the arrested person. Likewise, the evidence preservation justification rests on the need to prevent the arrested person from destroying evidence of a criminal offense. Press ENTER to continue

  23. A LITTLE HISTORY CHIMEL v. CALIFORNIA The Supreme Court declared that a search incident to arrest was limited to “the person” (the body and clothing) of the arrested person and the area within his or her immediate control. Press ENTER to continue

  24. A LITTLE HISTORY PRESTON v. UNITED STATES The Supreme Court ruled that a law enforcement officer could not search a location incident to arrest unless the arrested person could physically utilize weapons or escape tools or destroy evidence in the location at the time of the search. The purpose of searching a location incident to an arrest is to prevent the arrested person from acquiring or utilizing a weapon or escape tool or destroying evidence in that location. Once the arrested person is away from the location, the justification for the search disappears. Press ENTER to continue

  25. A LITTLE HISTORY KNOWLES v. IOWA The Supreme Court declared that a law enforcement officer may conduct a full search incident to arrest only in a case when an actual custodial arrest is made. This means that a complete search incident to arrest is not authorized in a case when a violator is issued a citation (or a ticket or similar notice) and released instead of being transported to jail. However, even in a case when a violator is simply issued a citation, an officer may “frisk” the violator (in accordance with Terry v. Ohio) and “conduct a ‘Terry patdown’ of the passenger compartment of a vehicle upon reasonable suspicion that an occupant is dangerous and may gain immediate control of a weapon . . . .” Press ENTER to continue

  26. SO, WAS OFFICERGRIFFIN RIGHT? Again, Mr. Gant was originally arrested for driving with a suspended license and for an outstanding warrant (also for driving with a suspended license). Mr. Gant was arrested outside of his car, handcuffed, and locked in the backseat of a patrol car. Once Mr. Gant was secured, police officers searched the passenger compartment of Mr. Gant’s car. Press ENTER to continue

  27. SO, WAS OFFICERGRIFFIN RIGHT? Officer Griffin believed that he was authorized to search Mr. Gant’s car as part of the search incident to the arrest. Was Officer Griffin correct? Press ENTER to continue

  28. -Press ENTER to continue THE ANSWER…

  29. THE ANSWER No. In Arizona v. Gant, the Supreme Court ruled that the search of Mr. Gant’s car was not a legitimate search incident to arrest. Therefore, the evidence discovered during the search was inadmissible. The cocaine and the plastic bag that the officers found must be suppressed. Press ENTER to continue

  30. SEARCHES INCIDENTTO ARREST A search incident to arrest is an exception to the constitutional requirement for a warrant. This exception is based on two separate justifications: officer safety and evidence preservation. Press ENTER to continue

  31. SEARCHES INCIDENTTO ARREST The officer safety justification rests on the need of law enforcement officers to search for and seize weapons and escape tools in order to prevent arrested persons from acquiring, retaining, or using them. Likewise, the evidence preservation justification rests on the need of officers to search for and seize criminal evidence to prevent its destruction. Press ENTER to continue

  32. THE SEARCH INARIZONA v. GANT The Supreme Court reasoned that neither officer safety nor evidence preservation justified the search of the passenger compartment of Mr. Gant’s car. Press ENTER to continue

  33. THE SEARCH INARIZONA v. GANT Mr. Gant was arrested 10 to 12 feet from his car. The search of the passenger compartment was conducted when Mr. Gant was handcuffed and secured in the back of a police car. It was impossible for Mr. Gant to access weapons or escape tools or destroy evidence in the passenger compartment of his car at the time of the search, because, at the time of the search, Mr. Gant was locked in the back of a police car. The search of the passenger compartment of Mr. Gant’s car was unreasonable and, therefore, unlawful. Press ENTER to continue

  34. -Press ENTER to continue POP QUIZ # 1

  35. POP QUIZ # 1 Deputy Lawrence stops a pickup truck for running a red light. The driver, Linda Parker is the only occupant of the truck. Ms. Parker displays a driver’s license. State driver’s license records indicate that Ms. Parker’s license is suspended and that she has been served with a notice of suspension. Press ENTER to continue

  36. POP QUIZ # 1 Deputy Lawrence promptly orders Ms. Parker to step out of her pickup truck. Ms. Parker complies. Deputy Lawrence places Ms. Parker under arrest for driving with a suspended license and handcuffs her. Deputy Lawrence searches Ms. Parker (including her body, clothing, and purse) incident to arrest and places her in the backseat of his patrol car. Press ENTER to continue

  37. What should Deputy Lawrence do next? (Select the best answer.) (A) Click here ►  if you think Deputy Lawrence should transport Ms. Parker to the jail and transfer her to the custody of the jail staff. He should leave Ms. Parker’s pickup truck where she stopped it unless impounding the truck is necessary for traffic safety. (B) Click here ►  if you think Deputy Lawrence should search the passenger compartment of Ms. Parker’s pickup truck for contraband and other evidence of criminal activity. After the search of the passenger compartment is completed, he should transport Ms. Parker to the jail and transfer her to the custody of the jail staff. He should leave Ms. Parker’s pickup truck where she stopped it unless impounding the truck is necessary for traffic safety. (C) Click here ►  if you think Deputy Lawrence should request a tow truck to impound Ms. Parker’s pickup truck and inventory the contents of the pickup while waiting for the tow truck. After the inventory is completed and the tow truck operator has removed the pickup, he should transport Ms. Parker to the jail and transfer her to the custody of the jail staff.

  38. POP QUIZ # 1 Sorry. You must selected an answer.Click here ►  to go back so you can select an answer.

  39. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER (A) GOOD ANSWER! It is a criminal offense for Ms. Parker to drive with a suspended license after she has been notified of the suspension. Deputy Lawrence is clearly justified in arresting Ms. Parker, searching her incident to arrest, and transporting her to the jail. Press ENTER to continue

  40. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER However, Deputy Lawrence is not authorized to conduct a search incident to arrest of the passenger compartment of Ms. Parker’s pickup truck. Neither officer safety nor evidence preservation justify a search of the passenger compartment because, at the time of the arrest, Ms. Parker was outside of her pickup. Press ENTER to continue

  41. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER Ms. Parker could not have used weapons or escape tools or destroyed evidence in the passenger compartment because she could not have reached them at or after the time of her arrest. Under these circumstances, a search of the passenger compartment of the pickup incident to the arrest would be unreasonable and, therefore, unlawful. Press ENTER to continue

  42. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER Deputy Lawrence may be authorized to inventory the contents of Ms. Parker’s pickup truck if he impounds it. The decision to impound the pickup must be in accordance with agency policy and based on traffic safety or crime prevention considerations or another reasonable cause. Click here ►  to continue.

  43. Click here ►  to continue. Please read and follow the instructions: don’t just press ENTER.

  44. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER (B) SORRY, WRONG ANSWER. Deputy Lawrence is not authorized to conduct a search incident to arrest of the passenger compartment of Ms. Parker’s pickup truck. Neither officer safety nor evidence preservation justify a search of the passenger compartment because, at the time of the arrest, Ms. Parker was outside of her pickup. Press ENTER to continue

  45. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER Likewise, Ms. Parker would already have been handcuffed in the backseat of Deputy Lawrence’s patrol car at the time when the search would have been conducted. She could not have used weapons or escape tools or destroyed evidence in the passenger compartment because she could not have reached them at the time of her arrest or of the search. Under these circumstances, a search incident to arrest of the passenger compartment of the pickup would be unreasonable and, therefore, unlawful. Press ENTER to continue

  46. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER However, it is a criminal offense for Ms. Parker to drive with a suspended license after she has been notified of the suspension. Therefore, Deputy Lawrence is clearly justified in arresting Ms. Parker, searching her incident to arrest, and transporting her to the jail. Press ENTER to continue

  47. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER Deputy Lawrence may be authorized to inventory the contents of Ms. Parker’s pickup truck if he impounds it. The decision to impound the pickup must be in accordance with agency policy and based on traffic safety or crime prevention considerations or another reasonable cause. Click here ►  to try again.

  48. Click here ►  to continue. Please read and follow the instructions: don’t just press ENTER.

  49. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER (C) GOOD ANSWER! It is a criminal offense for Ms. Parker to drive with a suspended license after she has been notified of the suspension. Deputy Lawrence is clearly justified in arresting Ms. Parker, searching her incident to arrest, and transporting her to the jail. Press ENTER to continue

  50. POP QUIZ # 1 ANSWER Deputy Lawrence may be authorized to inventory the contents of Ms. Parker’s pickup truck if he impounds it. The decision to impound the pickup must be in accordance with agency policy and based on traffic safety or crime prevention considerations or another reasonable cause. Press ENTER to continue