CRM_J 420 Midterm: Exam 2 Notes

9 Pages
Unlock Document

Criminal Justice
CRM_J 420
C Hemmens

Exam 2 Notes 2/9/2017 Stop and thisk - 4 Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and to make a search, you must have probable cause. o Any arrest or search that occurs without probable cause, is unreasonable and invalid. o Courts have allowed the police to do things that are less than full searches or arrests for less than probable cause a.k.a. stop and frisk. - Stop and Frisk came from Terry vs. Ohio (1969). o When the police don’t have probable cause but they have reasonable suspicion they can stop and frisk. o A stop is the beginning to an investigation. - Seizure o Arrest ▪ Form of seizure, all arrests are seizures. o Stop ▪ Not an arrest, but a form of seizure. ▪ Not all seizures are stops & not all seizures are arrests. ▪ Limited in time and limited in scope. o Encounter - Search o Cavity o Full body ▪ When you arrest somebody. o Frisk ▪ A form of search but different than full body or cavity searches, limited form of search. ▪ Police can do this if they think that they are in danger and that their safety is in danger. ▪ Minnesota vs. Dickerson (1993)- police were outside of a crack house, the police watched a man go up to the door and exchange something through the door. They didn’t know what it was. The police decided that they should investigate. They approached Dickerson who decided to run away from him. • Justice Scalia said: If an officer during a frisk feels something that is immediately recognizable as contraband, the police may go into the outer clothing and pull it out. • Dickerson’s case got thrown out because the crack was not immediately recognizable. o Encounter Reasonable Doubt Preponderance of the Evidence Probable Cause- need for full arrest/full search. Reasonable Suspicion- allows the police to do something, not as much as if they had probable cause, but they can do a stop and frisk. Suspicion that is reasonable and that is based on facts (articulable). “I had a suspicion that this person was up to criminal activity… I saw this/I saw that..” If a police officer has reasonable suspicion that a crime occurred or is about to, the officer has limited search and seizure authority. Totality of the Circumstances= Probable Cause and Reasonable Suspicion Mere Suspicion Terry vs. Ohio (1969) - Purpose - Scope - Standard of Proof - Stop and Frisk 2/14/2017 Stop and Frisk - Terry vs. Ohio (1969) o Where stop and frisk came from. - Reasonable Suspicion o (Something less than probable cause but more than mere suspicion). - Investigative Detention o Seizure that is limited in purpose to investigate. Basis for Stop - Personal Observation o Anything that a police officer sees that is a suspicious activity. - Informant Information o When the officer doesn’t personal observe something but an informant does. ▪ The officer has to look at the totality of the circumstances in regards to the informant (basis of knowledge, if the informant is a criminal etc. - Anonymous Tip, with Corroboration. o An anonymous tip alone= no reasonable suspicion. o The police have to corroborate the information. They have to collect additional information in order to act on the tip. - BOLO - Drug Courier Profile o A profile about what a typical drug courier looks like. ▪ What they tend to wear, drive, etc. ▪ May be used to develop reasonable suspicion. ▪ What is one thing that can never be used for this profile: race, ethnicity. • This violates the 14 amendment. ▪ Creates the level of suspicion so that they are able to take action. Duration of Stop - 90 minutes to search luggage. o The court said that this is too long to search someone’s luggage. o U.S. vs. Place (1983). - Removal from public to private area o Not okay because the public to private place changes the encounter. Then it becomes more like an arrest. o Florida vs. Royer (1983) - 27 hours for drug courier. o This is okay because under the circumstances, this was the amount of time that was required.22 o U.S. vs. Montoyade Hernandez (1985) Vehicles - Michigan vs. Long (1983) - Reasonable suspicion, they may frisk the driver and the passengers. They also may frisk the vehicle (look around the vehicle)ee Roadblocks - Discretion Limited o Can only do so much. - Time Limited o Officer has time to stop them and ask them about their ID, etc. Just have enough time to do a little bit of talking and asking for ID. - Balance of Purpose vs. Intrusion o 4 amendmentintrusion. o Very minor intrusion on rights. Arrest th - 4 Amendment-: Covers all seizure - Definitions: o Custody- taking someone in custody to either investigate them or to prosecute them. o For investigate/prosecute o Force or submission to authority o Has to have all of these - Test: MI vs. Chesterut (1988). Elements of Arrest - Seizure o Actual o Constructive - Intent to arrest o Express o Implied - Arrest Authority o With warrant- 95% of arrests occur without warrants, but that doesn’t make them unlawful. ▪ No criminal liability if the warrant ends up not being right or being messed up. ▪ The officer has to make an arrest if they know that there is a warrant somewhere out there. o Without warrant ▪ Has to have probable cause (totality of the circumstances). - Resisting Arrest o Lawful o Unlawful ▪ You can’t resist even if it’s an unlawful arrest. ▪ You have to submit to their arrest and then sue them later. ▪ Wyoming and a state in the south still let people resist an unlawful arrest. o Today, you will end up getting arrested. 2/16/2017 MI vs. Chesternut (1988). - Reasonable Person o A person is under arrest, when a reasonable person, viewing the situation in totality of the circumstances would not feel free to leave at the end of the encounter. - “Free to leave” Arrest - Custody, by force/submission - Intent to arrest o The police show that they are going to arrest you. Arrest Authority (can arrest with a warrant or without a warrant). - Warrant - w/o warrant Warrant - Jurisdiction o If you have an arrest warrant for Whitman county and you are in Seattle, you are allowed to be arrested their. - Extradition o If you have an arrest warrant for Whitman County and you get caught in Idaho, you have to be moved back to the county where the arrest warrant was issued. o If that person doesn’t want to challenge the warrant, then they can say no and get a hearing in the state they are found in to make sure that the warrant is right. W/O Warrant - Felony o Presence ▪ Greater authority to arrest. o Public or private ▪ Cannot arrest in someone’s home without a warrant unless they see that the crime occurred in their house. - Misdemeanor o Presence only ▪ Limited authority to arrest, only if the officer sees it then the officer can arrest, but they cannot arrest without a warrant. o Domestic Violence o Traffic Accident ▪ They have the authority to arrest when there’s something like a DUI. o Assault ▪ Can also be charged to someone for domestic violence. ▪ Getting close to the level of felony. ▪ Have to arrest he
More Less

Related notes for CRM_J 420

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.