Case Law

STUDY
PLAY

Terms in this set (...)

Terry v. Ohio:
Stop and Frisk.
Duran v. City of Douglas, Arizona
-First Amendment.
-Mere boisterous conduct was alone insufficient to give a police officer any cause to detain the plaintiff.
Michigan v. Long
Plain View. Supreme can review states Supreme court decision unless they appeal to state laws.
Chimel v. California:
Wingspan Rule. Search incidental to lawful arrest
Aguilar v. Texas
2 Prong Rule: 2 prong rule (Informant Credibility and Information Reliable)
Wong Sun v. U.S
"Fruit of Poisonous Tree."
Tennessee v.Garner
4th. Amendment. /Use of force due to scape of felony suspect, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that felony suspect die than.....
Carrol v. U.S
Search of Vehicle based on probable cause (vehicle mobility).
Mapp v. Ohio:
Exclusionary Rule.
Mincey v. Arizona:
Murder Exception (Warrant to search even for murder cases).
Bumper v. N. Carolina
If there is coercion there cannot be consent.
Miranda v. Arizona:
5th. Amendment/ Miranda's rights.
In Re Gault:
6th. Amendment.
Steagald v. US and Hudson v. State:
Arrest warrant does not give police the authority to enter the home of a third person, even if the police has a reason to believe the wanted person is present in that home.
Baskin v. Smith:
handcuffing too tightly and failing to double lock the handcuff may lead to excessive force.
Howard v. State (1979):
when contraband (marihuana) is recovered as a result of unlawful arrest, the contraband seize falls under the "fruit of poisonous tree doctrine."
US v. Mattlock:
a land lord cannot give consent to have tenant apartment searched.
Illionis v. Gates (1983):
Totally circumstances. Veracity of information and trust on informant. Anonymous letter regarding drug sales is not enough for warrant.
Florida v. Royer and US v.Mendenhall:
-At airport, no consensual once bag is taken to a closed room away from owner.
- No probable cause.
-U.S Supreme Court determined that the detention was a seizure tantamount to an arrest, and since the officer did not have not probable cause, it was an illegal seizure.
Minnesota v. Dickerson:
Strengthens Terry v. Ohio (Stop and Frisk)
Katz v. U.S. 389 US 347 (1967):
-Case law which allows for categories of evidence for which a search may be conducted. Also refers to the fact that the 4th, amendment protects people, not places. What a person exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not subject of 4th. Amendment protection....
-Telephone booth expectation of privacy.
Weeks v. US:
"Exclusionary Rule" was first created by the US Supreme Court based on this case. As written, the rule applied only to the actions of federal officers.
Beck v. Ohio:
-Probable cause exists when the facts and circumstances known to the officer would warrant a belief by a reasonable man.
-Arrested for past activities with not informant support.
Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 383 (2007):
-4th Amendment Risk/Benefit Standard.
-"[I]n judging whether [officer's] actions were reasonable, we must consider the risk of bodily harm that [officer's] actions posed to [suspect] in light of the threat to the public that [officer] was trying to eliminate." (Taser.
Beaver v. City of Federal Way:
-Each use of force on a person that is a seizure is the application of force and must be objectively reasonable). (Taser).
-Objectively reasonable: amount of force use and extent of the injury.
Graham v. Connor:
("immediate" v. "possible") Factors as risk prioritized ranked by Chew v Gates. Only case used when evaluating use of force. (Taser)
Objectively reasonable: amount of force use and extent of the injury.
Brown v. Texas:
Stop could be lawful based on reasonable suspicion, but cannot be charge with failure to ID.
US v. Mendenhall
Airport drug courier, walk and talk not a seizure when consensual conversation.
US v. Robinson
Search Arrested person clothing upon arrest.
US v. Edwards
Search of clothing in jail incidental to lawful arrest is lawful even with lapse of time.
California v. Acevedo
-Marihuana found in container in trunk based on good intel.
-Carrol doctrine.
Payton v. New York
Prohibits the police from making a warrantless and nonconsensual entry into a suspect's home in order to make a routine felony arrest.
Lippert v. Texas
Non-occupant present at house does not justify frisk/search/arrest by mere presence.
California v. Greenwood
Warrantless search of garbage is justified if left outside the cartilage of home.
Wrehen v. US
Not a pretextual stop, traffic stop is permisible as long as a reasonable officer in the same circumstances could have stopped the car for suspected traffic violation.
Heitman v. Texas
Police jimmied a locked briefcase during an inventory and found meth. Exclusionary rule.
Baity v. State
-Reasonable suspicion stop
-Baity was suspicious and had a crow bar/cash box at 04:56 am.
Garrity v. New Jersey
Criminal v. Administrative investigation (e.g. Peace Officer involved in shooting)