Upgrade to remove ads
Only $35.99/year

PSCI-3250 Final Exam Cases

Terms in this set (25)

Greenwood v. CA
Garbage can at curb can be searched without reasonable suspicion within the 4'th amendment, warrantless when on curb or outside curtilage of home
Mapp v. Ohio
- Denied entry into basement, fake warrant used, find porn and charged
- First toEstablish exclusionary rule protection to exclude impermissible evidence
Terry v. Ohio
- Observed suspicious conduct, patted down and charged with possession of weapon
- "Stop and frisk" when reasonable suspicion of being armed and dangerous is not a violation of 4'th amendment - only for weapons
AZ v. Fulminante
- 5'th amendment issue
- Held in FL, wanted in AZ for serious crime, confession wanted, undercover placed in cell, received threats in custody, undercover offers protection if he confesses, confesses, taken to AZ moving to suppress evidence (not free/voluntarily made), suppressed
- If government pressures to make a statement, even if true, inadmissible
Miranda v. AZ
- 2 hour interrogation, signs confession to rape charge

- 5'th amendment right against self incrimination - Need both (i)Custodial arrest and (ii)Interrogation to be required - duty to informs of 5'th amendment rights

- Only required when suspect knows its an officer
RI v. Innis
- Arrested for armed robbery, invoked miranda rights, silent in police car, interrupts officer conversation directing them to firearm they were talking about (not questioning)
- No protection against unforeseen response when there was no interrogation or functional equivalent of one
Gideon v. Wainwright
- Gideon charged with felony, could not afford lawyer, denied court appointed lawyer, loses trial representing self
- Does not have to be capital crime to receive appointed counsel, state felony and indigent requires access to representation(6'th)
Brady v. Maryland
- Brady and other charged with murder, other defendant confessed to the killing that prosecutor withheld
- Prosecution withholding exonerating evidence is violation of 14'th amendment
Batson v. KY
- Batson black, charged with crime, prosecutor dismisses the only 4 jurors from peremptory challenges - loses trial
- PATTERN of Racially backed peremptory challenges violates 14'th and 6'th amendment
Florence v. Burlington
- Arrested for failure to pay warrant, strip searched twice at facility in custody, sues for violation of 4'th unreasonable search (low risk inmate)
- Searches reasonable when in custody for any reason, facilities best interest for safety
AZ v. Youngblood
- DNA evidence taken and preserved from rape kit, but clothes not preserved - blood identified in photo lineup and charged

- state failure to preserve useful evidence not a denial of due process, must show bad faith by police to prove loss/destruction was denial of due process

- (i)Item must have apparent exculpatory value before destroyed - (ii)Is in such a nature that evidence wouldn't be obtain similar evidence by other means - (iii)prosecutor must be aware of exculpatory value and destroyed it in bad faith (negligence/careless is not enough to prove)
Furman v. GA
- Death penalty out of control, not deemed cruel and unusual punishment in circumstances, established 5 standards for states to be allowed to consider:
- (i)Underlying crime must involve a death, (ii)Whoever sentences must have discretion to decide if appropriate, (iii)Statute must include aggregating/qualifying factors, (iv)Defendant must be allowed to present mitigating factors, (v)Distinction between guilt phase (trial) and sentencing phase (after)
Berghuis v. Thompkins
- Thomkins remains silent, but never clearly invoked miranda during interrogation - after many hours, answers yes about praying to god to forgive him, admitted into evidence
- SC established that invoking 5'th amendment must be clear and verbal, simply staying silent is not enough to offer protection
Schmerber v. CA
- Accident, DUI arrest, taken to hospital, blood drawn without consent
- Consent not required because of exigent, time sensitive circumstances if:
- (i)Government interest must outweigh seriousness of intrusion, (ii)Probability of evidence being found, (iii)Whether search warrant was obtained, (iv)Whether procedure below skin is reasonable - based on these, SC said it was reasonable
- Michigan, however, requires a warrant or consent
CA v. Hodari
- Drugs thrown in chase before police contact admissible because not seized yet
- Fleeing suspect is not seized under 4'th unless officers apply force or maintain control of person making it clear they are not free to leave
Whren v. US
- Pretextual stop - high drug area, truck sat long time in intersection, fails to signal, pulled over and holding bag of coke - moved to suppress lacking reasonable suspicion/PC for drug dealing
TN v. Garner
- 15 year old fleeing burglary, hopping fence shot dead - not clearly armed and wasn't
- 4'th violation prohibits deadly force unless necessary to prevent fleeing felon and PB to believe suspect is significant threat - unconstitutional use of deadly force
Kyllo v. US
Suspicion of pot growing, thermal image device used to scan heat from home, warrant then issued - 4'th amendment violation - must use what is available to public or have warrant
Sell v. US
- Government can force antipsychotic meds against unwilling person to make them competent to stand trial - establishes 4 requirements:
- (i)Court must find important government interest, (ii)Court must conclude the medication will significantly further likelihood government interest in making competent and that the medication will not have impactful side effects, (iv)That the medication is necessary with no alternative less intrusive means of producing same result (after trying others first), (iv)That administration of drugs is medically appropriate for their issues - physician perspective rather than from the courts that they would recommend that treatment
Riley v. CA
- Traffic stop, expired license, required to take into custody
- Search incident to arrest, looks through phone contents
- Warrant needed, everything else within arms reach allowed, but cannot go through contents of phone without warrant (inside cig pack, bags, etc. allowed)
Rodriguez v. US
- Traffic stop, warning issued, K9 search request, refused, pulled from car, meth found
- Stop complete, argued prolonged unreasonably to suppress
- 4'th violation wins - stop complete and warning issued, exceeded reasonable time to call dog to handle the matter
MO v. Seibert
- Arrested/interrogated for arson, no miranda given, confession obtained, given break and read miranda, questioned again and confesses (two-step confession)
- SC suppressed both confessions - deliberate two-step not allowed
Hinton v. AL
- Lawyer used bad expert, could have used more money for more credible option
- Ineffective counsel found - ineffective and would have changed outcome
Carpenter v. US
- 4 men arrested for robberies, one provides cell phone numbers of others - FBI uses to link cell records
- Initially not a 4'th violation to obtain cell phone records alone and not phone contents - It is public information and no expectation of privacy because of providers
- But, SC ruled warrant is needed for tracking data
OH v. Robinette
- Traffic stop ends, information given back, consent given to search
- No notice of "free to leave" required to request/consent to search post stop
- No 4'th violation because of voluntary consent
Other sets by this creator