Study sets, textbooks, questions
Upgrade to remove ads
Criminal Procedure Final
Terms in this set (34)
The period when police have shifted their attention from a general investigation to building a case against a suspect
When SCOTUS uses Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment
Fifth - To decide whether a custodial interrogation before formal charges was coercive
Sixth - To decide if the interrogation after formal charges was coercive
Fourteenth - Determining voluntariness at any point in the process
Miranda Public Safety Exception
Evidence derived from unwarned questioning is admissible if the judge believes the purpose of the questioning is to protect public safety
Functional Equivalent of a Question test
Fifth Amendment, applies before formal charges.
Deliberately Eliciting a Response test
Sixth Amendment, applies after formal charges. Focuses solely on police intent. Provides broader protection for privacy and more restrictions for officers.
Sixth Amendment Protection
After charges are filed, any incriminating statements made when a lawyer isn't present, even if voluntary, violate the suspect's right to counsel
Wolf v. Colorado and Mapp v. Ohio
In Wolf, SCOTUS ruled that unreasonable searches clause applies to states, but it is up to them on how to enforce it.
In Mapp, SCOTUS ruled that the exclusionary rule applies to the states.
*Exclusionary rule was created for fed gov't in 1914
Exceptions to Fruit of the Poisonous Tree (3)
1. Attenuation - Evidence can be admitted if the connection is weakened enough from the original illegal action. Can include a time lapse or act of free will
2. Independent Source - Even if police illegally witness evidence, building a search warrant due to seeing it but not based on that evidence is legal
3. Inevitable Discovery - If the illegally gotten evidence would have eventually been discovered anyways, it is permissible.
Other Exceptions to Exclusionary Rule (3)
1. Collateral Use - proceedings not directly related to the case-in-chief
2. Cross Examination
3. Knock-and-Announce - If police have a search warrant and do not knock and announce, evidence is still admissible
Lawsuits against federal law enforcement officers. Plaintiffs must prove:
1. Officers were acting under color of authority
2. Officers' actions deprived the defendant of a constitutional right
Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) action
Lawsuits brought against the federal government for officers' actions. This partially waived sovereign immunity.
Qualified Immunity for law enforcement officers
Officers cannot be held liable for their actions if they meet the test of objective legal reasonableness, measured by legal rules that were clearly established at the time of the conduct.
Defense of Official Immunity
A public official is not personally liable to an individual for his lawful duties and discretion unless he is guilty of a willful or malicious wrongdoing.
1983 Lawsuits against police departments
Allows plaintiffs to sue state and local police departments for violating constitutional rights. Must prove:
1. Officers acted under the color of law
2. Officers' actions caused a deprivation of constitutional rights
*Plaintiffs can only recover for deliberate actions, not accidental or even negligent actions
*State and local officers have qualified immunity
Defense of Vicarious Official Immunity
In states without respondeat superior, police departments and local govt's can claim the official immunity of their employees.
1983 Lawsuits against the local government units
Plaintiff must prove:
1. Officer acted in accordance with policies or approved decisions; includes actions not formally approved through official channels
2. The action caused the violation of constitutional rights
*A local gov't can only be sued when an injury happens in accordance with official policy, not just by chance.
Police departments and govt's cannot be sued for failing to protect private citizens from harm from another person.
Remedies for bad judges
Judges have absolute immunity; they cannot be sued even for malicious wrongs. They can only be impeached or voted out of office.
Functional Immunity for Prosecutors
When acting as an advocate, prosecutors have absolute immunity.
When acting as administrators of investigators, they have qualified immunity.
Burden of proof for denying bail
Clear and convincing evidence
When does the right to counsel attach?
At all critical stages of criminal proceedings, usually after the first appearance.
When a defendant is entitled to an attorney (crimes)
When they are are charged with a crime punishable by a jail term. However, if a jail sentence is not pursued, there is no right to counsel.
Standards followed at preliminary hearings (2)
1. Prima Facie - If the prosecution presented evidence that could convict the defendant without any defense, he can be sent to trial
2. Directed Verdict - Treating it as a trial, if there is enough evidence to send the case to a jury, the defendant can be sent to trial. Less than beyond a reasonable doubt.
When jeopardy attaches
Jury Trials - When the jury is impaneled and sworn in
Bench Trials - When the judge begins to hear evidence
When double jeopardy doesn't attach (2)
1. If the defendant moves to dismiss the case or accepts a mistrial, the prosecution can retry.
2. If the judge dismissed the case or ordered a mistrial because there is a manifest necessity for doing so (hung jury), the prosecution can retry.
Moral Serious Standard
Some offenses that may carry a sentence of less than six months are still serious enough to warrant a jury trial. Ex. DWI
The prosecution can introduce hearsay if the government meets two tests:
1. The witness is unavailable and it is necessary to use out-of-court statements.
2. The evidence was obtained under circumstances that clearly establish its reliability
A plea that allows a defendant to plead guilty while nonetheless maintaining his or her innocence.
Other than a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt, not just a preponderance of the evidence by the trial judge. Later changed
Collateral Consequences Exception
The principle that cases aren't moot if conviction can still cause legal consequences despite completion of the sentence.
Lockyear v. Andrade
Upheld California's three strikes law; 50 years in prison for shoplifting was not cruel and unusual, because proportionality only applies in extraordinary cases
Colorado v. Connelly
Defendant's confession was voluntary despite his mental illness and hallucinations. Court dismisses considering free will as basis for review.
Hudson v. Michigan
As long as police have a search warrant, violating the knock-and-announce rule is permissible.
Castle Rock v. Gonzales
There is no constitutional right to have restraining orders enforced that can be remedied by being awarded damages.
Sets with similar terms
Criminal Law and Procedure Ch. 10-13
Criminal Procedures Final
Other sets by this creator
Civ Pro Timing
Civ Pro Midterm
Criminal Procedure Quiz
Other Quizlet sets
US II Honors: The United States In World War II
Principle of Macroeconomics
Native American Unit Study Guide