chap 3

LEGAL ISSUES CHAPTER THREE

1

Criminal Procedure • The process by which a person accused of a crime is processed

through the criminal justice system • Governed by rules that protect the rights of the accused • On the other hand, influenced by need to ensure civil and orderly society

• Before 1937, few procedural rulings by the US Supreme Court • Bill of Rights safeguards didn’t yet apply to the states

• “Due process revolution” of the 1960s resulted in great change • Warren Court = increased protection of civil rights

2

Searches and Seizures of Persons • Individuals are protected from unreasonable search and seizure

by the 4th amendment • Offers legal guidelines for when officers can stop, frisk, and arrest

• Stop, frisk, and arrest requires varying degrees of certainty • Reasonable suspicion = Alabama v. White (1990) • Probable cause = Brinegar v. US (1949)

3

Searches and Seizures of Persons • The exclusionary rule

• Method for enforcing reasonableness standard of the 4th Amendment • Weeks v. U.S. (1914) • Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

• Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is an exclusionary rule extension • What does this doctrine maintain?

• US v. Seslar (1993) identified three types of police-citizen interactions • Consensual encounters, investigative detentions, arrests

• What are the evidentiary requirements for each?

4

Searches and Seizures of Persons • Stop and frisk requires reasonable suspicion of a crime

• Terry v. Ohio (1968) • Arizona v. Johnson (2008) • Illinois v. Wardlow (2000) • Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993)

• Arrests require probable cause that individual committed a crime • US v. Watson (1976) • Payton v. New York (1981) • Chimel v. California (1969) • Maryland v. Buie (1990) = protective sweeps

5

Searches and Seizures of Property • Search warrant is preference for search & seizure of property

• What is a search warrant? What must it demonstrate? • Affidavit = written description by officer of that to be searched/seized

• Searches do not always require a warrant, however • Plain view doctrine

• Arizona v. Hicks (1987) • Open fields doctrine

• Oliver v. US (1984), US v. Dunn (1987), California v. Greenwood (1988)

6

Searches and Seizures of Property • There are further exceptions to the search warrant requirement

• Hot pursuit exception • Consent

• Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973) • Vehicle searches

• Pretextual stops • Whren v. U.S. (1996)

• Sobriety checkpoints • Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz (1990)

7

Searches and Seizures of Property • There are a host of other important vehicle-specific decisions:

• Indianapolis v. Edmond (2000) • Illinois v. Lidster (2004) • Carroll v. US (1925) • US v. Ross (1982) • Wyoming v. Houghton (1999)

8

Searches and Seizures of Property • Warrantless searches

• Carroll v. U.S. (1925) • US v. Ross (1982) • Wyoming v. Houghton (1999)

• Bright-line Rule = officers may search passenger compartment if a passenger is under arrest • New York v. Belton (1981) • Thorton v. US (2004) • Arizona v. Gant (2009)

9

Interrogations and Confessions • 5th Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination • Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

• What does the Miranda Warning advise? • Other important 5th amendment decisions

• Dickerson v. United States (2000) • Edwards v. Arizona (1981) • Maryland v. Shatzer (2010)

• Waiver of rights must be done “knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily”

10

Interrogations and Confessions • There are other exceptions to the Miranda Warning requirement

• Public safety exception • When there exists a significant, immediate threat to public safety • New York v. Quarles (1984)

• Inevitable discovery • When police can demonstrate physical evidence would’ve been recovered • Brewer v. Williams (1977) • Nix v. Williams (1984)

11

Civil Liability • Civil liability is a growing concern in American policing • Costs of liability in policing

• Civil lawsuits against police continues to grow • 30,000 lawsuits per year • $780 billion annually

• Most suits are decided in favor of police, however • Avenues of liability

• State courts for violations of state law • Federal courts for violations of constitutional or federally protected rights

12

Civil Liability in State Courts • Intentional torts involve behavior specifically designed to cause

some type of injury or harm • Key to these torts = culpable state of mind of the officer • Excessive use of force is most common of such behaviors

• Wrongful death • Assault • Battery • False arrest

• Discuss the kind of police behavior that would lead to such lawsuits.

13

Civil Liability in State Courts • Negligent torts require inadvertent require inadvertent and

unreasonable behavior resulting in damage • Four criteria must be established to prove negligence:

• Legal duty • Breach of duty • Cause • Actual damage or injury • Failure to arrest

• Thurman v. City of Torrington (1985) • Explain each of these criteria.

14

Civil Liability in Federal Courts • Recent increase in filings against the police in federal courts

• Most typical avenue is Title 42 of the US Code, Section 1983, which has two essential components • Color of law • There must be a violation of a constitutionally/federally protected right

• Graham v. Connor (1989)

15

Civil Liability in Federal Courts • There are 4 instances when defendants can offer defense for

their actions to negate a federal lawsuit • Absolute immunity • Qualified immunity • Probable cause • Good faith

• What is required for each of these defenses?

16

Emerging Liability Issues for the 21st Century • Contemporary policing and zero-tolerance strategies may affect

police civil liability • Community policing may decrease liability

• Increase in women’s and minority voices in organizations • Improvements in attitudes toward police • Improvements in confidence in police and the CRJ system

• Community policing may increase civil liability • Contacts increase • Discretion at the lowest level of the organization

17

Emerging Liability Issues for the 21st Century • Other important changes are related with civil liability

• Use of Force • Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) or Tasers

• Bryan v. McPherson (2009) • Civil liability has an impact on police officers

• Depolicing is an outcome • What is depolicing?

18

Summary • Criminal procedure requires police officers to make decisions

based on a set of evidentiary criteria to uphold civil liberty • Exceptions to evidentiary requirements exist, however

• Plain view doctrine; open fields doctrine • Hot pursuit exception; motor vehicle searches • Public safety exception

• Changes to policing in the 21st century, especially community policing, have affected civil liability issues • For the better and for the worse

19