Class Eleven: Stop and Frisk; Warrant Exceptions

1. Class Eleven: Stop and Frisk; Warrant Exceptions

2. Is race a permissible factor? OK if witness description includes race Impermissible as sole basis for stop by roving patrol (US v. Brignoni-Ponce) Permissible as sole basis for secondary inspection at immigration roadblock (US v. Martinez-Fuerte)(initial stop permissible without any suspicion)

3. Problem 3-14 Did police actions constitute a detention? If so, supported by RS? Was search authorized by valid consent? If not, was search a valid �car frisk�?

4. Profiles Formal profiling Informal profiling

5. Problems with Profiles May reproduce arrest patterns Secret Inconsistent Malleable Racial overtones

6. Supreme Court on Profiles Mainly agnostic Looks through profiles to factors in support of reasonable suspicion or probable cause But credits �consideration of the modes or patterns of operation of certain kinds of lawbreakers�

7. Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement Two categories: exceptions excusing only need for warrant; exceptions excusing need for PC and warrant First elaborated during primacy of �warrant clause� Exceptions should be no broader than necessary to address exigency Permits search or seizure of person or thing in circumstances otherwise demanding warrant (automobiles)

8. �Special Needs� cases Started with Camara v. Muni Court Introduced reasonableness balancing Searches or stops that are primarily non-criminal (administrative or regulatory) Broad category � housing inspections to DUI roadblocks

9. Searches Incident to Arrest Of homes (Chimel v. CA) Of individuals (US v. Robinson) Of cars (NY v. Belton) All contingent upon lawful (PC + Warrant or exception) custodial arrest Search itself requires no PC Roughly contemporaneous

10. Chimel v. CA Police performing an in-home arrest may search the arrestee�s person and the area within his immediate reach Rationale: officer safety; preservation of evidence Why limited to arrest? What is �area within immediate reach�? MD v. Buie � protective sweep

11. US v. Robinson Police officers may search arrestee�s person upon valid custodial arrest, and open containers encountered in the course of the search.

12. NY v. Belton A police officer, upon valid custodial arrest of any occupant of a vehicle, may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle and open containers found therein. What is �passenger compartment�? Who is an �occupant�? (Thornton v. US)

13. Exigent Circumstances Any circumstances that make seeking of a warrant impracticable Important values (officer safety, integrity of evidence) would be compromised by delay �Hot pursuit� ; evanescent evidence, and other defined exigencies Case by case analysis of others (home searches) Balancing severity of crime and severity of intrusion Impact of technology?

14. Vehicle Searches Car �frisk� - MI v. Long Car search incident to arrest - NY v. Belton Auto exception to warrant requirement - Carroll v. US Searches of containers in vehicles - CA v. Acevedo Inventory searches - CO v. Bertine

15. Auto Exception to Warrant Requirement PC necessary Mobility and privacy rationales May not apply to car parked at residence - Coolidge v. NH Scope extends to any area of car where evidence or contraband may be concealed, including containers What is a car? Does exception apply to other vehicles (boats, airplanes)?

16. Next time: Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement, pp. 380-419