chapter 6 ackerman

24
Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006 Chapter 6: Due Process and Police Procedure CRJ101 – Fall 2006 Ackerman

Upload: acklin1921

Post on 15-May-2015

666 views

Category:

Education


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Chapter 6: Due Process and Police

Procedure

CRJ101 – Fall 2006

Ackerman

Page 2: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Rules of Evidence

Police procedure is guided by rules defining what is legal evidence admissible in a court of law.

The rules of evidence define legal search and seizure of places, autos, and persons and also define exceptions to the exclusionary rule.

Ackerman

Page 3: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

The Exclusionary Rule

• It prohibits the use of evidence or testimony obtained in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

• Established by Weeks v. United States (1914)

• Established by Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

• Fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine

Ackerman

Page 4: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

The Fourth Amendment states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause…”

Page 5: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement

• Search Incident to Lawful Arrest

• Plain-View Searches

• Consent to Search

• Search of Automobiles (Carroll v. U.S.)

• Search of Persons: The Pat-Down (Terry v. Ohio)

Page 6: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Search Incident to Lawful Arrest

• When police make a lawful arrest, they are allowed to make a search of that person without a search warrant– How extensive can the search be?

• Immediate control

Ackerman

Page 7: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Plain-View Searches

• evidence in plain view is admissible in court

– MUST BE COMPLETELY IN VIEW

– The police can not uncover anything to find it

Ackerman

Page 8: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Consent to Search

• if a person gives permission for a search, any evidence found is admissible

– The person who gives permission must have the ability to do so

Ackerman

Page 9: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Search of Automobiles (Carroll v. U.S.)

• The Carroll Doctrine (1925)

• Evidence obtained in the search of an automobile (without a warrant) is admissible in court if:– Probable cause to believe that a crime has

occurred– Circumstances are such that delay in searching

the car would result in loss of evidence

Ackerman

Page 10: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Search of Persons: The Pat-Down (Terry v. Ohio)

• Pat-down Search – is conducted to ensure the safety of the police officer– If the officer feels what may be a weapon, he or

she may reach into the pocket and examine it– If it is another object that the officer feels may

be illegal, he or she can not reach in and get it– Evidence obtained in an illegal pat down is not

admissible

Ackerman

Page 11: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Other Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement

Search and seizure without probable cause, a warrant, or consent is permitted in some circumstances, especially when there is clear and present danger or when public safety is at stake.

Ackerman

Page 12: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Other Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement

• The Public Safety Exception– Right to search without probable cause for the

public good (buses, subways, airplanes)

• The Good Faith Exception – Clerical errors resulting in the police executing

what they believe to be a valid warrant

Ackerman

Page 13: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Interrogations and Confessions

In defining admissible testimony, rules of evidence also reflect case law relating to the Fifth Amendment:No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…nor shall any person be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Ackerman

Page 14: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Standards for Admissible Confession

• The confession must be given knowingly and not as a consequence of lies or deception.

• The suspect must be informed of his or her rights• The confession must be voluntary• Confessions may not be obtained through threats• Confessions may not be obtained through use of pain

or through constructive force, such as beating up one suspect in front of another and telling the second suspect that he or she is next if a confession is not forthcoming

Page 15: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Brown v. Mississippi (1936)

• Confessions obtained by force (torture) are inherently tainted. – Confessions MUST be voluntary

Ackerman

Page 16: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Ashcraft v. Tennessee (1944)

• Landmark Case

• Confessions obtained through round-the-clock interrogation are inadmissible

Ackerman

Page 17: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Arrest Miranda

Procedural laws also govern arrests made by police and define false arrest.

• Miranda v. Arizona (1966)• The court issued an opinion in which it

summarized all of the rights (the Miranda rights) of a citizen during police arrest and interrogation

Ackerman

Page 18: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Figure 6.4 – The Miranda Rights

Page 19: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Right to an Attorney?

• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

–If you cannot afford an attorney one will be provided to you free of charge by the state

Ackerman

Page 20: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Oversight of Police Practice and Procedure

Police accountability is assured through many layers of oversight, both external and internal and both official and public.

The Courts and Prosecutors

All county prosecutors and state attorney generals have the power to correct unprofessional police practices by refusing to file charges when they suspect that the police did not act properly.

Ackerman

Page 21: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Role of the FBI

• Campaigns for professionalism in law enforcement through training

• Provides training for state and local police departments

• Trains nearly 1000 police officers in technical subjects

• Provides free on-site training for hundreds of police departments

Page 22: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Internal Affairs

The police who police the police

• Conducts random drug tests

• Reacts to citizen complaints filed against the police department

Page 23: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Investigative Commissions and Police Commissions

• The National Crime Commission (Wickersham Commission) – Investigation of the police addressing public concern that the police were lax in the enforcement of Prohibition

Ackerman

Page 24: Chapter 6   ackerman

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2006

Investigative Commissions and Police Commissions

• Knapp Commission – 1972 – Corruption in the NYPD caused by gambling,

narcotics, loan-sharking and prostitution

• Mollen Commission – 1994– NYC – keeping quiet about crimes of other

officers was in essence creating or acting as criminal gangs

Ackerman