CJ2012 - Criminal Justice Book CH 5

Term
1 / 17
Procedural Law
Click the card to flip 👆
Terms in this set (17)
Procedural Law
The body of laws governing how things should be done at each stage of the criminal justice process ** Due to separation of power, police have the power to arrest people, but do not have the power to prosecute people for the charges they were arrested.
Rules of Evidence
Requirements for introducing evidence and testimony in court ** Stipulates the requirements for introducing evidence and define the qualifications of an expert witness and the nature of the testimony he or she may give. 1949, State courts were free to write their own rules of evidence.
Exclusionary Rule
Evidence can be declared inadmissible ** A rule that prohibits the use of evidence or testimony obtained in violation of the 4th and 5th amendments of the US Constitution. Established in Weeks V US 1914 and Mapp V Ohio 1961.
Fruit of the Poisoned Tree Doctrine
A rule of evidence that extends the exclusionary rule to secondary evidence obtained indirectly in an unconstitutional search. Established in Silverthorne Lumber Co. V US 1918 and Wolf V Colorado 1949. Comes from the analogy, if the tree is poisoned, then the fruit is poisoned as well.
Search Warrant
Legal permission, signed by a judge, for police to conduct a search. Must be issued by a judge and based on probable cause.
Probable Cause
The likelihood that there is a direct link between a suspect and a crime.
Search Incident to Lawful Arrest
The right of police to search a person who has been arrested without a warrant. When police make a lawful arrest, they are entitled to make a search of the person arrested without a search warrant. Cannot extend their search to areas not occupied by person arrested or beyond person's reach areas.
Plain-View Search
The right of the police to gather without a warrant evidence that is clearly visible. If items are in plain view of the area a police officer is located, evidence obtained is admissible. If a police officer must move items to find evidence then evidence obtained is inadmissible. EX: Warrant for 52 inch TV, can't open drawers to look as a TV will not fit. Any evidence in drawer would be inadmissible.
Carroll Doctrine
Evidence obtained in the search of an automobile without a warrant is admissible in criminal court if: 1. Police officer has probable cause to believe that a crime has occurred. 2. The circumstances are such that a delay in searching the auto would result in loss of evidence.
Pat-Down Doctrine
The right of the police to search a person for a concealed weapon on the basis of reasonable suspicion, established in Terry V Ohio 1968. Police operate in an environment that can be life threatening so they are allowed to take certain REASONABLE precautions in dealing with the public.
Public Safety ExceptionThe right of the police to search without probable cause when not to do so could pose a threat of harm to the public. If the police are chasing a person that has just committed a crime and that person dumps the gun in the chase, the police have the right to perform the search without a warrant for the presence of the weapon may pose a serious threat to the public.Good Faith ExceptionAn exception to the requirement that police must have a valid search warrant or probable cause when they act in good faith on the belief that the search was legal. EX: Warrant has a type on the date of the search and the police search on the actual date requested, acting in good faith, the warrant is valid.Clear and Present DangerA condition relating to public safety that may justify police use of deadly force against a fleeing suspect. EX: Posed by a fleeing person in the public realm, use of deadly force may be justifiable.Self-IncriminationStatements made by a person that might lead to criminal prosecution.Indigent DefenseThe right to have an attorney provided free of charge by the state if a defendant cannot afford one, established in Gideon V Wainwright 1963.Miranda RightsRights that provide protection from self-incrimination and confer the right to an attorney, of which citizens must be informed before police arrest and interrogation, established in Miranda V Arizona 1966.ArrestThe restriction of the freedom of a person by taking him or her into police custody. If the police have handcuffed you and/or you are sitting in the back of a patrol car, you have been arrested.