Public Copy CASPER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. Investigative Procedure: Search & Seizure. 4 - Operations 03C -

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Public Copy CASPER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. Investigative Procedure: Search & Seizure. 4 - Operations 03C -"

Transcription

1 Chapter: Change # 4 - Date of Change CASPER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Number: 4.03C Section: 03C - Investigative Procedure: Search & Seizure RECORD OF CHANGES/REVISIONS Section Changed Description of Change/Revision Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page i

2 Chapter: 4 - CASPER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Effective: 3/2017 Signed: Total Pages: 10 Number: 4.03C Section: 03C - Investigative Procedure: Search & Seizure Chief of Police POLICE DEPARTMENT PSCC 4.03C.1 POLICY All search and seizure procedures shall be strictly conformed to the law and to this policy. 4.03C.2 PURPOSE This policy establishes rules and guidelines for the lawful and appropriate application of search and seizure. 4.03C.3 SEARCH AND SEIZURE A. Officers of the Casper Police Department are regulated in searches and seizures of persons, places, and property by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 4 of the Wyoming Constitution. B. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits government intrusion upon the privacy and property rights of the people. Areas specifically afforded constitutional protections are persons, houses, papers, and effects. The Fourth Amendment contains two distinct clauses: 1. All search and seizure must be reasonable; 2. Probable cause must exist before search or arrest warrants may be issued. a. Warrants must particularly describe the place(s) to be search and person(s) or thing(s) to be seized. 4.03C.4 REASONABLENESS AND EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY A. A search under the Fourth Amendment is defined as a government intrusion into a place where people have reasonable expectation of privacy (REP) (Katz v. United States); or when the government trespasses on private property with the intent to obtain information (United States v. Jones). The guiding principles of the Fourth Amendment, and therefore of the law of search and seizure, is "reasonableness" and expectation of privacy. Any search and/or seizure which is not "reasonable" under the "totality" (all) of the circumstances violates the Fourth Amendment and is unconstitutional. Officers shall strive carefully and energetically to assure that their actions are at all times "reasonable." A police action is "reasonable" if there are good, lawful, reasons for it. Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 1 of 10

3 4.03C.5 THE WARRANT REQUIREMENT A. Searches and seizures generally require a search warrant in order to be reasonable. Officers conducting searches without a warrant bear the burden of proving that the search was reasonable. B. In order to obtain a search warrant an officer must be able to show probable cause to believe that specific persons or property to searched/seized may be found at a particular location. C. Rule 41 of the Wyoming Rules of Criminal Procedure (W.R.Cr.P.) governs procedures relating to the issuance, form, execution, and return of search warrants. 1. Application for a search warrant and seizure warrant must be made in the form of a sworn affidavit that will be reviewed by a judicial officer, who, upon finding of probable cause, will issue the warrant. D. Certain constitutional rules apply to entry into private premises by officers to affect an arrest: 1. Entry into the home of a person to be arrested requires an arrest warrant, absent a valid consent, hot pursuit or exigent circumstances, as detailed later in this policy. 2. Entry into third party premises to arrest a person who is a visitor (not a resident) of the premises requires a search warrant, absent a valid consent, hot pursuit or exigent circumstances, as detailed later in this policy. 3. Note: Specific requirements and authorization for arrests of persons on private premises is covered in greater detail in Policy 4.04 Arrests & Custody Procedures. 4.03C.6 EXCEPTIONS TO THE WARRANT REQUIREMENT A. Some search and/or seizure actions do not require warrants but are nevertheless subject to strict legal requirements and procedural rules. Following is a summary of those requirements and rules: B. Frisk. 1. This is a limited, "pat-down" type, protective search of outer clothing and quickly accessible carried belongings. It is permitted only during lawful seizures of persons (Terry Stops), and only if the officer has reasonable suspicion that a person is armed and may constitute a danger to the officer or another person based on specific objective facts and logical conclusions that the officer's experience enables him/her to draw from those facts. The officer must be able to articulate that suspicion. 2. If the subject is in or beside a vehicle, and if the officer reasonably suspects the presence of weapon(s) that could be quickly reached and used against him/her, he or she may conduct a limited search of quickly accessible portions of the passenger compartment for weapons. 3. Frisks usually involve on-going criminal conduct, but officers are permitted to stop and, if appropriate, frisk someone suspected of being involved in an already-committed crime. 4. Officers may use information to stop and frisk from sources of information other than their own personal observations including: a. Training; b. Education; and Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 2 of 10

4 c. Prior experience in similar situations. C. Search Incident to Arrest. 1. A search incident to arrest allows for a complete search of the arrestee and the area of immediate access to the arrestee for the purpose of locating weapons, means of escape, and/or evidence of the crime. It is permitted pursuant to every lawful arrest and must be conducted contemporaneously with the arrest. Probable cause to arrest is required, but the search may be conducted whether or not there is any reason to believe evidence and/or weapons will be found. 2. The search may extend to the person, his or her clothing and carried belongings, and the area to which he or she has immediate access (sometimes called "lunge area"). a. If the subject is seized from a motor vehicle, the search may not include the vehicle if the subject has been removed from the vehicle and secured elsewhere, which will typically be the case. Where that has occurred, there shall be no search incident to arrest of the arrestee s car unless there is reason to believe that evidence of the crime of arrest is present in the passenger compartment, in which case that area may be searched. b. Nothing in this subsection eliminates the possibility in some cases of an inventory search or probable cause Carroll search, where facts and law permit. Digital information stored in cell phones or computers shall not be searched without a warrant, unless there is a valid consent to search or probable cause plus exigent (emergency) circumstances necessitating an immediate warrantless search. 3. In the event that an arrestee wants or needs access to certain areas for his or her convenience and/or comfort, the officer shall inform the arrestee that such access is conditional upon the arrestee's consent to a prior search by the officer of the areas to which access is requested. If the arrestee consents, the appropriate search shall be conducted. If consent is withheld, the arrestee shall not be allowed the requested access. These strict rules are absolutely necessary for officer protection and survival as well as the safety of the arrestee and others. D. Protective Sweeps. 1. Protective sweeps are a form of a search incident to arrest, which allows officers to conduct a quick and limited search of a premise to protect the officers and others on the scene of an arrest from an immediate danger. 2. Scope of a Protective Sweep. A protective sweep is not a full search of a dwelling. The search/sweep is narrowly confined to a cursory visual inspection of those places in which a person might be hiding. Officers may look in closets, under beds, and other places a person could hide in the immediate room where the arrest occurs. a. Incriminating evidence found during a lawful protective sweep may be seized under the plain view doctrine. This discovery of evidence does not, however, justify a subsequent warrantless search of the residence for additional evidence. Officers may use the incriminating evidence to obtain a search warrant for the premises. 3. Timing of the Protective Sweep. The SCOTUS has ruled that a protective sweep may last no longer than it takes to complete the arrest and depart the premises. (Maryland v. Buie). The longer officers take to complete a protective sweep, the more likely a court will find the sweep excessive. For example, a protective sweep was upheld when the special response team opened doors only to areas large enough to harbor a person; there was no evidence that the officers opened drawers or that the sweep of the house was over extensive; and the sweep was short, lasting Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 3 of 10

5 only about a minute. A two-hour protective sweep was held unlawful because it appeared to be a fishing expedition for evidence and because it greatly exceeded the permissible scope. Protective sweeps lasting as little as thirty minutes have been held unlawful. 4. Two types of Protective Sweeps. a. Automatic Protective Sweeps: Officers armed with an arrest warrant (or a search warrant for a person to be arrested) may enter the premises and search for the arrestee in any area that could conceal a person. Once the arrestee is located and the arrest is made, as a precautionary matter and without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, [officers may] look in closets and other spaces immediately adjoining the place of arrest from which an attack could be immediately launched. Buie. Although the limited search is for people, any evidence or contraband found in plain view may be seized. b. Extended Protective Sweeps: In order for officers to sweep beyond the area immediately adjacent to the place of arrest, there must be articulable facts which, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, would warrant a reasonably prudent officer in believing that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene. Buie. Facts establishing a reasonable suspicion that another, dangerous person is present at the scene include, but are not limited to an occupant s demeanor, suggestive utterances or actions by an occupant, noises indicating that additional persons are present at the residence, and cars in the driveway registered to criminal associates of the suspect. 5. Arrests Occurring Outside a Premise. a. There is no bright-line rule that prohibits officers from performing protective sweeps of premises when an arrest occurs outside of that building. Instead, as with an extended protective sweep, the officers must have reasonable suspicion to believe a third party who poses a danger to officers is inside the home. If facts supporting that reasonable suspicion exist, it does not matter whether the arrest occurred inside or outside the residence. E. Inventories. 1. Inventories are non-investigatory in nature, and are conducted by officers for the following reasons: and/or loss; and a. Protection of the owner of the property; b. Protection of the officer(s) and the Department against false claims of theft c. Allows for discovery and proper caretaking of dangerous instrumentalities and of valuable or important property. 2. It is the policy of this Department that all vehicles (and other property) which are impounded be inventoried. 3. Inventories shall extend only to areas and containers within a vehicle or other belonging that can be opened and accessed without breakage or damage. 4. Inventory searches will be properly documented in the incident or supplemental report, and when property is taken into custody by officers, all proper property and evidence procedures shall be followed under the Department s policy. F. Plain View Doctrine. Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 4 of 10

6 1. Seizure of property under plain view doctrine is permitted when an officer who is lawfully present in an area, sees in plain view an item that the officer has probable cause to believe is contraband or other evidence of crime, and that can be seized without any additional privacy intrusion. a. Additional privacy intrusion example: an officer lawfully present on the street may not use plain view doctrine rules to force warrantless entry into a home in which the officer can see, through an un-curtained front window, a marijuana cigarette being smoked. Such an entry requires an additional privacy intrusion. Said another way - the officer is not lawfully present in the place from which the seizure can be accomplished. 2. Limitations to plain view doctrine. a. Artificial devices that aid in or enhance the officer s view cannot be used; however, a flashlight is generally acceptable, provided that the officer has the legal right to be present in that specific location when using it; b. Moving or rearranging items to better identify suspected contraband or items (i.e. - identify a serial number on an item) is not supported by the plain view doctrine. G. Mobile Vehicle Exception/ Carroll Doctrine 1. This search is permitted when an officer has probable cause to believe that evidence of crime is in an apparently operable motor vehicle that is in a public area. No additional or exigent circumstances are required. 2. The search may extend to any area within the vehicle that could reasonably contain the evidence sought. a. Closed containers may be opened and searched if there is probable cause to believe they contain evidence of crime. Breakage is permitted if reasonably necessary to reach criminal evidence. 3. For purposes of this subsection, a "public area" is any area on which public vehicular traffic is normally permitted, (e.g., streets, highways, grocery or mall parking lots, apartment complexes parking lots, etc.). H. Consent Searches. 1. This search is permitted when, during a lawful officer citizen contact, a person who has a reasonable expectation of privacy in an area (e.g., owner, resident, tenant, or vehicle operator) voluntarily grants permission for police to search that area. a. Note: Compliance with an order or demand by police is not a "voluntary" grant of permission. This search does not require probable cause or reasonable suspicion, but is limited to those areas "reasonably" within the consent. (Example: during a lawful stop, an officer asks a vehicle operator for "permission to search this car for drugs." Permission is granted. Unless the driver objects or withdraws consent, the consent search may extend to any containers within the vehicle that can be opened without breakage.) 2. The person granting consent must use, access, and/or control the property. In cases of joint and/or conflicting ownership/relationship, the following general rules apply: a. If two or more persons have joint ownership of property, any may grant consent; however, if one of the parties denies consent officers shall respect the denial of consent by the one and shall not utilize the purported consent of the other; Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 5 of 10

7 b. A landlord, including a hotel or motel manager, cannot consent to a search of a tenant's premises, unless the tenant has been evicted or has abandoned the property; c. A husband or wife, or one member of a cohabiting unmarried couple, may consent to a search of areas in common ownership or use, but if either one is present and denies the search no search can be conducted without a warrant; d. A parent may consent to a search of premises occupied by a dependent child if the parent also has access to the premises; e. Employees cannot give valid consent to a search of employer's premises unless they have been left in custody/control of the premises; f. An employer may generally consent to a search of premises used by employees, except premises used solely by an employee (i.e., a locker). 3. The scope of a consent search is limited to the area for which consent has been given, and within this area officers may search only into areas where the objects sought could reasonably be hidden. 4. Consent may be withdrawn at any time; if it is withdrawn, the officer shall immediately stop the search (unless, by that time, other lawful search justifications are present). 5. Refusal to give consent, in itself, cannot justify further law enforcement action. I. Open Fields or Areas. 1. Certain open fields and/or areas (wooden areas, forests, deserts, swamps/wetlands, etc.), though sometimes on private property, do not necessarily involve a reasonable expectation of privacy. Therefore, an officer may enter these areas without a warrant and seize any evidence in plain view. Curtilage is not included in this exception to the warrant requirement. 2. Curtilage although curtilage is difficult to define, it generally is the area around a home/dwelling that a person would reasonably expect to remain private. A person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the curtilage of the home. The following four factors should be considered when determining whether the area to be searched is part of the curtilage: a. The area s proximity to the home; b. Whether the area is included within an enclosure surrounding the home; c. Whether the area is being used for the intimate activities of the home; d. The steps taken by the resident to protect the area from observation by passersby. J. Abandoned Property. 1. A search warrant is not required for property that has been abandoned. Two conditions must apply to constitute abandoned property: a. Property was voluntarily abandoned; b. Property was discarded outside the area in which a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. K. Exigent Circumstances. Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 6 of 10

8 1. Where there is an emergency/time critical need to act immediately without a warrant to avert unacceptable consequences in a serious and/or dangerous matter, an officer may enter private premises or a vehicle (a REP area) without a warrant to deal with such exigencies. 2. The threshold justification for warrantless action based on exigent circumstances is probable cause. The speculative possibility that an emergency might exist does not create exigent circumstances. 3. Once such exigencies have been extinguished officers shall return immediately to normal rules of search and seizure, including adherence to warrant requirements. 4. There are generally three re-occurring types of exigencies which allow officers to make warrantless entries into REP areas: a. When officers must enter a REP area to protect or preserve life, or prevent death or serious harm to a person(s). b. When officers are in hot pursuit of a suspect to be apprehended and chase that felon/suspect into a REP area. i. To apply the hot pursuit exigency, an officer must begin a lawful custodial action in a public area and the suspect subsequently flees into a REP area to avoid arrest. In such cases, the officer may enter those premises without a warrant to complete the custodial action, but only if the pursuit of the fleeing subject is immediate and continuous c. When officers believe that the time it would take to secure a warrant would result in the destruction of evidence. i. Note: The possible loss of evidence of minor, non-dangerous offenses does not constitute exigent circumstances, nor do public annoyances such as loud music. 5. Crime Scenes. a. There is no crime scene exception to the warrant requirement. Generally, however, under the exigent circumstances described above, officers may initially enter a crime scene without a warrant in order to provide needed emergency assistance, locate and assist victims, apprehend perpetrators and secure important evidence that would likely to be lost to the passage of time. Once those exigencies are eliminated, ordinary warrant requirements apply to further searching, except by valid consent. 4.03C.7 PRIVATE CONDUCT (PRIVATE SEARCH BY A PRIVATE CITIZEN) A. The Fourth Amendment does not regulate private conduct, regardless of whether that conduct is reasonable or unreasonable. Evidence of a crime that is obtained through a private search may be admissible against a defendant, even if the private search was conducted illegally. B. While the Fourth Amendment may not apply to a private search by a private citizen, it does apply when that citizen is acting as an instrument or agent of the government. The issue in such a search necessarily turns on the degree of the officer s participation in the private party s activities. In making this determination, the courts typically focus on three factors: 1. Whether the government knows of or acquiesces in the private actor s conduct; 2. Whether the private party intends to assist law enforcement officers at the time of the search; and Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 7 of 10

9 3. Whether the government affirmatively encourages, initiates, or instigates the private action. 4.03C.8 STRIP AND BODY CAVITY SEARCHES A. The Department recognizes that the use of strip and/or body cavity searches may, under certain conditions, be necessary to protect the safety of officers, civilians and/or other prisoners, and to detect and secure evidence of a crime. Recognizing the intrusiveness of these searches on individual privacy, they shall be conducted with deference for the human dignity of those being searched and in accordance with the procedural guidelines as set forth in this section. B. Strip Searches. 1. Definition: Any search of an individual requiring the removal or rearrangement of some or all clothing to permit the visual inspection of the genitals, buttocks, anus, female breasts or undergarments covering such areas. 2. The decision to strip search must be based on specific factors which give rise to probable cause or the most compelling of exigent circumstances, that the prisoner may be concealing weapons, escape implements, contraband, or evidence. Probable cause may be based upon, but is not limited to, one or more of the following criteria: a. The nature of the offense charged; b. The arrestee s appearance and demeanor; c. The circumstances surrounding the arrest; d. The arrestee s criminal record, particularly past crimes of violence and narcotics offenses; e. The discovery of evidence in plain view or in the course of a search prior to an arrest; and f. Detection of suspicious objects beneath the suspect s clothing during a search incident to arrest. 3. Field strip searches of prisoners shall be conducted only in the rarest of circumstances under exigent circumstances where the life of officers or others may be at risk. Explicit approval of a supervisory officer will be obtained prior to such a search. 4. Where articulable, reasonable suspicion exists to conduct a strip search, the arresting officer shall make a request for such action to the detention supervisor or other designated authority. 5. When authorized, strip searches may be conducted only: a. On lawfully arrested persons; b. By the least number of personnel necessary and by the same sex if readily available; and c. Under conditions that provide privacy from all but those authorized to conduct the search. 6. The prisoner will not be required to remain unclothed any longer than is absolutely necessary. Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 8 of 10

10 7. Non-sworn personnel will not be used to conduct, assist or witness a strip search. 8. Following a strip search, the officer performing the search shall submit a written report that details; at a minimum, the following: search; a. The facts and circumstances establishing the reasonable suspicion for the b. Date and place of the search; c. Identity of the officer conducting the search; d. The names of the approving supervisor and the witness officer; e. Identity of the individual searched; f. A detailed description of the nature and extent of the search; and g. Any weapons, evidence, or contraband found during the search. C. Body Cavity Searches. 1. Definition: Any search involving not only visual inspection of skin surfaces, but also the internal physical examination of body cavities and, in some instances, organs such as the stomach cavity. 2. The mouth is the only body cavity that may be searched without a warrant. If an officer has probable cause to believe that a prisoner is concealing something in his or her mouth, the officer may use reasonable force to prevent the swallowing of the object and may remove the object. 3. Should examination of a prisoner during a search or other information lead an officer to believe that the prisoner is concealing a weapon, evidence or contraband within a body cavity, the following procedures shall be followed: a. The officer shall inform the prisoner of the intent to conduct a body-cavity search, thus giving the prisoner the opportunity to voluntarily surrender the suspected contraband. b. The officer shall consult with the shift supervisor and the on call District Attorney to determine whether probable cause exists to seek a search warrant for a body cavity search. The decision to seek a search warrant shall recognize that a body cavity search is highly invasive of personal privacy and is reasonable only where the suspected offense is of a serious nature or poses a threat to the safety of officers or others. c. If probable cause exists for a body cavity search, an affidavit for a search warrant shall be prepared that clearly defines the nature of the alleged offense, the basis for the officer s probable cause and specific factors giving rise to the belief that the item(s) sought are concealed in the prisoner's body. d. On the basis of a search warrant, a body cavity search shall be performed by qualified medical personnel in surroundings suitable to their needs. e. Body cavity searches shall be performed with due recognition of privacy and hygienic concerns. 4. Upon completion of a body cavity search, any items recovered will be documented on the search warrant return and in the officer's report. Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 9 of 10

11 5. The officer s report should include the fact that a body cavity search was conducted and: a. The facts and circumstances establishing the probable cause for the search; b. Date and location where the search took place; c. Identity of the individual searched; d. The name of the approving supervisor; e. Name of the judge authorizing the warrant; f. Identity of the medical practitioner conducting the search; g. The name of the witness officer; h. A description of the nature and extent of the search; and i. Results of the search including any weapons, evidence, or contraband found. 6. The case file should include a copy of the report of the medical practitioner performing the search. Section: 4.03C CPD Policy and Procedure Manual [v2017] Page 10 of 10

DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT

DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT Policy 7.4 Searches Without a Warrant Effective Date: 05/01/15 Replaces: 2-5 Approved: Ivan Barkley Chief of Police Reference: DPAC: 1.2.3 I. POLICY In order to ensure that constitutional

More information

COVINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

COVINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE COVINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE Subject: SEARCH AND SEIZURE Date of Issue: 01-01-1999 Number of Pages: 6 Policy No. P220 Review Date: 06-01-2007 Distribution: Departmental Revision

More information

ORDER TYPE: NEED TO KNOW. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to define legal implications and procedures involved when a search is performed.

ORDER TYPE: NEED TO KNOW. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to define legal implications and procedures involved when a search is performed. Page 1 of 5 YALE UNIVERSITY POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDERS Serving with Integrity, Trust, Commitment and Courage Since 1894 ORDER TYPE: NEED TO KNOW 312 EFFECTIVE DATE: REVIEW DATE: 19 MAR 2012 ANNUAL

More information

.3 Before being presented to a judge, all applications for search warrants are to be reviewed by the State's Attorney s Office for approval.

.3 Before being presented to a judge, all applications for search warrants are to be reviewed by the State's Attorney s Office for approval. CHAPTER 18 SEARCH AND SEIZURE 18.1 GENERAL POLICY.1 It is the policy of the Hagerstown Police Department that searches and seizures shall be conducted in accordance with all state and federal laws, and

More information

ATHENS-CLARKE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT. Policy and Procedure General Order: 1.06 Order Title: Strip and Body Cavity Searches

ATHENS-CLARKE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT. Policy and Procedure General Order: 1.06 Order Title: Strip and Body Cavity Searches ATHENS-CLARKE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT Policy and Procedure General Order: 1.06 Order Title: Strip and Body Cavity Searches Original Issue Date 10/02/17 Reissue / Effective Date 10/09/17 Compliance Standards:

More information

GENERAL ORDER PORT WASHINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT

GENERAL ORDER PORT WASHINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER PORT WASHINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: STRIP SEARCHES NUMBER: 1.7.5 ISSUED: 5/5/09 SCOPE: All Sworn Personnel EFFECTIVE: 5/5/09 DISTRIBUTION: General Orders Manual RESCINDS 1.8 AMENDS

More information

GENERAL ORDER PORT WASHINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT

GENERAL ORDER PORT WASHINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER PORT WASHINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: SEARCH AND SEIZURE NUMBER: 1.7.2 ISSUED: 5/5/09 SCOPE: All Sworn Police Personnel EFFECTIVE: 5/5/09 DISTRIBUTION: General Orders Manual RESCINDS

More information

OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF ST. MARY'S COUNTY, MD

OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF ST. MARY'S COUNTY, MD EFFECTIVE DATE: September 30, 2016 SUBJECT: AFFECTS: OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF ST. MARY'S COUNTY, MD SEARCH AND SEIZURE All Employees Policy No. 4.02 Section Code: Rescinds Amends: 2/22/2016 B 4.02 SEARCH

More information

a) The entry is limited in purpose and scope to discovery of a number as to which there is no reasonable expectation of privacy;

a) The entry is limited in purpose and scope to discovery of a number as to which there is no reasonable expectation of privacy; Crestwood Police General Order Warrantless Vehicle Searches Purpose: The purpose of this directive is to provide general guidelines and procedures for commissioned personnel to follow in conducting vehicle

More information

TEXARKANA, TEXAS POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDERS MANUAL. TPCA Best Practices Recognition Program Reference Searches Without a Warrant

TEXARKANA, TEXAS POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDERS MANUAL. TPCA Best Practices Recognition Program Reference Searches Without a Warrant Effective Date February 1, 2008 Reference Amended Date Distribution All Personnel City Manager City Attorney TPCA Best Practices Recognition Program Reference Review Date January 1, 2012 Pages 5 This Operations

More information

Virginia Commonwealth University Police Department

Virginia Commonwealth University Police Department Virginia Commonwealth University Police Department SECTION NUMBER CHIEF OF POLICE EFFECTIVE REVIEW DATE 1 10 9/4/2013 10/4/2014 SUBJECT SEARCH AND SEIZURE GENERAL It is the policy of the VCU Police Department

More information

THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND

THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND 10 THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND THE RULE OF LAW AND THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE SEARCHES WITHOUT WARRANTS DIVIDER 10 Honorable Mark J. McGinnis OBJECTIVES: After this session, you will be able

More information

NH DIVISION OF LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT AND LICENSING ADMINISTRATION & OPERATIONS MANUAL

NH DIVISION OF LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT AND LICENSING ADMINISTRATION & OPERATIONS MANUAL NH DIVISION OF LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT AND LICENSING ADMINISTRATION & OPERATIONS MANUAL CHAPTER: O-411 SUBJECT: Searches Without A Warrant REVISED: February 9, 2010 Review EFFECTIVE DATE: August 14, 2009 DISTRIBUTION:

More information

Maryland-National Capital Park Police Prince George s County Division DIVISION DIRECTIVE DISTRIBUTION EFFECTIVE DATE

Maryland-National Capital Park Police Prince George s County Division DIVISION DIRECTIVE DISTRIBUTION EFFECTIVE DATE Maryland-National Capital Park Police Prince George s County Division DIVISION DIRECTIVE TITLE FIELD INTERVIEWS & SEARCH AND SEIZURE PROCEDURE NUMBER SECTION DISTRIBUTION EFFECTIVE DATE REVIEW DATE Operational

More information

Rule 318D - STRIP SEARCH, VISUAL BODY CAVITY SEARCH, AND BODY CAVITY SEARCH PROCEDURES

Rule 318D - STRIP SEARCH, VISUAL BODY CAVITY SEARCH, AND BODY CAVITY SEARCH PROCEDURES Rules and Procedures Rule 318D December 13, 2005 Rule 318D - STRIP SEARCH, VISUAL BODY CAVITY SEARCH, AND BODY CAVITY SEARCH PROCEDURES This rule is issued to establish guidelines, regulations and procedures

More information

TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL 4.1 INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL 4.1 INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SUBJECT: Investigative Procedure: Constitutional Law 4.1 EFFECTIVE: 04/26/2017 REVISED: 04/12/2017 TOTAL PAGES: 23 Kris Kramer Kris Kramer, Chief of Police CALEA: 1.2.3; 1.2.4; 1.2.5; 1.2.8; 1.3.1;44.2.3;

More information

Search Warrant Exceptions. Coach Presnell

Search Warrant Exceptions. Coach Presnell Search Warrant Exceptions Coach Presnell Agenda Objective Arguments For Warrantless Search Lecture Actual Exceptions Web-Ex for Exceptions Objective Students will be able to apply to the exceptions to

More information

This policy outlines the process and procedures to be considered and followed by members when making an arrest.

This policy outlines the process and procedures to be considered and followed by members when making an arrest. CHAPTER: 1.9 Page 1 of 7 NEW ORLEANS POLICE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS MANUAL CHAPTER: 1.9 TITLE: ARRESTS EFFECTIVE: REVISED: PURPOSE This policy outlines the process and procedures to be considered and followed

More information

GENERAL ORDER OAK BROOK POLICE DEPARTMENT OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS

GENERAL ORDER OAK BROOK POLICE DEPARTMENT OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS GENERAL ORDER OAK BROOK POLICE DEPARTMENT OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS Title: SEARCH AND SEIZURE Number: OPR-349 Author: Commander Jeffrey Weber Page: 1 of 5 Effective Date: 01-05-96 Distribution: ALL Revised Date:

More information

POCOLA POLICE DEPARTMENT

POCOLA POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES SUBJECT SEARCH AND SEIZURE NUMBER: 8.000 EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/24/2015 SCHEDULED REVIEW DATE: DATE REVIEWED: APPROVED BY: 06/14/2016 ISSUE DATE: 12/14/2015 REVISION DATE: Chief Steve

More information

GENERAL POLICE ORDER CLEVELAND DIVISION OF POLICE

GENERAL POLICE ORDER CLEVELAND DIVISION OF POLICE GENERAL POLICE ORDER CLEVELAND DIVISION OF POLICE ORIGINAL EFFECTIVE DATE : ASSOCIATED MANUAL: CHIEF OF POLICE: REVISED DATE: 08/20/2018 RELATED ORDERS: NO. PAGES: 1of 9 NUMBER: Search and Seizure This

More information

The Hackers Guide to Search and Arrest. by Steve Dunker J.D. It is legal for an Officer at any time to Ask a person to stop and talk.

The Hackers Guide to Search and Arrest. by Steve Dunker J.D. It is legal for an Officer at any time to Ask a person to stop and talk. The Hackers Guide to Search and Arrest. by Steve Dunker J.D. I. When Can an Officer Legally Stop an individual? A. Voluntary Stops It is legal for an Officer at any time to Ask a person to stop and talk.

More information

Warrantless Searches. Objectives. Two Types of Warrantless Searches. Review the legal rules Discuss emerging issues Evaluate fact patterns

Warrantless Searches. Objectives. Two Types of Warrantless Searches. Review the legal rules Discuss emerging issues Evaluate fact patterns Warrantless Searches Jeff Welty UNC School of Government welty@sog.unc.edu (919) 843-8474 Objectives Review the legal rules Discuss emerging issues Evaluate fact patterns Two Types of Warrantless Searches

More information

CPC Search & Seizure Work Group

CPC Search & Seizure Work Group 2018 CPC Search & Seizure Work Group A report and recommendations on the (5) draft Search & Seizure Policies submitted to the Cleveland Community Police Commission for review on 8/20/18 by the City of

More information

MARYLAND v. BUIE 494 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 1093, 108 L.Ed.2d 276 (1990).

MARYLAND v. BUIE 494 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 1093, 108 L.Ed.2d 276 (1990). MARYLAND v. BUIE 494 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 1093, 108 L.Ed.2d 276 (1990). JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court. A "protective sweep" is a quick and limited search of a premises, incident to an

More information

Warrantless Searches

Warrantless Searches Warrantless Searches By Sergeant Marcus Paxton Criminal Justice Institute School of Law Enforcement Supervision Session XXII November 5, 2003 Table of Contents Introduction 1-4. History of Search & Seizure

More information

Subject FIELD INTERVIEWS, INVESTIGATIVE STOPS/DETENTIONS, WEAPONS PAT-DOWNS & SEARCHES. DRAFT 7 April By Order of the Police Commissioner

Subject FIELD INTERVIEWS, INVESTIGATIVE STOPS/DETENTIONS, WEAPONS PAT-DOWNS & SEARCHES. DRAFT 7 April By Order of the Police Commissioner Subject STOPS/DETENTIONS, WEAPONS PAT-DOWNS & Date Published Page DRAFT 7 April 2018 1 of 18 POLICY By Order of the Police Commissioner It is the policy of the Baltimore Police Department (BPD) to conduct

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION Case 1:09-cv-03286-TCB Document 265-1 Filed 12/08/10 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION GEOFFREY CALHOUN, et al. Plaintiffs, v. RICHARD PENNINGTON,

More information

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN November 1, 2002 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN November 1, 2002 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA PRESENT: All the Justices PHILLIP JEROME MURPHY v. Record No. 020771 OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN November 1, 2002 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA In this appeal,

More information

THE LAW PROFESSOR CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION

THE LAW PROFESSOR CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION THE LAW PROFESSOR CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #1 Officer Jones was notified by Oscar, a police informant, that Jeremy had robbed the jewelry store two hours earlier. Jeremy was reported

More information

THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT

THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT Subject: Search & Seizure Warrants Page No. 1 THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER Authority: Chief of Police Date Issued: January 15, 2014 Gregory L. Eyler Subject: Search & Seizure Warrants Accreditation

More information

Chief of Police: Review Date: July 1

Chief of Police: Review Date: July 1 Directive Type: General Order Effective Date 05-17-2016 General Order Number: 05.09 Subject: Legal Process and Court Appearances Amends/Supersedes: Section 05, Chapter 09, Legal Process, revised 2008 Distribution:

More information

Criminal Law: Constitutional Search

Criminal Law: Constitutional Search Tulsa Law Review Volume 7 Issue 2 Article 8 1971 Criminal Law: Constitutional Search Katherine A. Gallagher Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr Part of the Law

More information

Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence

Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence Search & Seizure Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence [Simplified] The Fourth Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches

More information

Introduction to the Constitution and Law Enforcement Exam

Introduction to the Constitution and Law Enforcement Exam Name Date Introduction to the Constitution and Law Enforcement Exam 1. Which level of proof is based on no factual information? A. Mere hunch B. Probable cause C. Reasonable suspicion D. Beyond a reasonable

More information

NO: TALLAHASSEE, December 15, Mental Health/Substance Abuse CONTRABAND CONTROL IN THE MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT FACILITIES

NO: TALLAHASSEE, December 15, Mental Health/Substance Abuse CONTRABAND CONTROL IN THE MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT FACILITIES CFOP 155-8 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CF OPERATING PROCEDURE CHILDREN AND FAMILIES NO: 155-8 TALLAHASSEE, December 15, 2017 Mental Health/Substance Abuse CONTRABAND CONTROL IN THE MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT

More information

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY [Cite as State v. Milton, 2011-Ohio-4773.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 25668 Appellant v. REGGIE S. MILTON Appellee APPEAL

More information

I. PURPOSE DEFINITIONS RESPECT FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. Page 1 of 8

I. PURPOSE DEFINITIONS RESPECT FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. Page 1 of 8 Policy Title: Search, Apprehension and Arrest Accreditation Reference: Effective Date: February 25, 2015 Review Date: Supercedes: Policy Number: 6.05 Pages: 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 2.1.3, 2.1.7, 2.5.3, 4.3.1, 4.3.4

More information

PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT DIRECTIVE 5.28

PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT DIRECTIVE 5.28 PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT DIRECTIVE 5.28 Issued Date:01-25-13 Effective Date:01-25-13 Updated Date: 04-07-16 SUBJECT: SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORTING RELATING TO TERRORISM 1. PURPOSE A. To track and

More information

From the Attorneys at the Legacy Counsel James Publishing

From the Attorneys at the Legacy Counsel   James Publishing Was That Police Search and Seizure Action Legal? From the Attorneys at the Legacy Counsel www.legacycounselfirm.com James Publishing Contents I. Introduction... 4 II. The Ground Rules... 6 A. The Police

More information

5. Pursuit... 2:25 6. High Speed Chases... 2:26 III. IDENTIFICATIONS... 3:1 A. In-Person Identifications... 3:1 1. Right to Have Counsel Present...

5. Pursuit... 2:25 6. High Speed Chases... 2:26 III. IDENTIFICATIONS... 3:1 A. In-Person Identifications... 3:1 1. Right to Have Counsel Present... CONTENTS I. PURPOSE AND USE OF THIS MANUAL... 1:1 II. THE POLICE-CITIZEN ENCOUNTER... 2:1 A. Police Activities That Require No Evidence of Wrongdoing... 2:2 1. Routine Patrol... 2:2 2. The Consensual Encounter...

More information

The Fourth Amendment places certain restrictions on when and how searches and seizures

The Fourth Amendment places certain restrictions on when and how searches and seizures Handout 1.4: Search Me in Public General Fourth Amendment Information The Fourth Amendment places certain restrictions on when and how searches and seizures can be conducted. The Fourth Amendment only

More information

Know Your. Help End Discriminatory, Abusive & Illegal Policing!

Know Your. Help End Discriminatory, Abusive & Illegal Policing! Know Your Rights! Help End Discriminatory, Abusive & Illegal Policing! ChangeTheNYPD.org @changethenypd facebook.com/changethenypd For updates via mobile text, text justice to 877877 This brochure describes

More information

CHAPTER 3 SECTION VI 10/01/16 Vehicle Searches

CHAPTER 3 SECTION VI 10/01/16 Vehicle Searches CHAPTER 3 SECTION VI 10/01/16 Vehicle Searches I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to provide agency personnel with guidelines for the search of motor vehicles. II. POLICY It is the policy of this

More information

NEW MEXICO ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES SAMPLE INMATE SEARCH POLICY

NEW MEXICO ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES SAMPLE INMATE SEARCH POLICY NEW MEXICO ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES SAMPLE INMATE SEARCH POLICY I. REFERENCES: (4-ALDF-2A-20, 4-ALDF-2C-01, 4-ALDF-2C-03-4, 4-ALDF-2C-06, SJ-090, and SJ- 091) (NMAC Adult Detention Professional Standards:

More information

MARIN COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT CUSTODY DIVISION POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL

MARIN COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT CUSTODY DIVISION POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL MARIN COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT CUSTODY DIVISION POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL CHAPTER 2 BOOKING DATE: 1-4-18 CUS 2 14 PAGE 1 of 7 INMATE SEARCHES / CLOTHED, STRIP, BODY SCAN, VISUAL AND PHYSICAL BODY

More information

Chapter 10 WHERE THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE DOES NOT APPLY

Chapter 10 WHERE THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE DOES NOT APPLY Chapter 10 WHERE THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE DOES NOT APPLY 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. Learning Objectives Define standing for Fourth Amendment purposes. Explain the role of consent in searches

More information

MINNESOTA V. DICKERSON United States Supreme Court 508 U.S. 366, 113 S.Ct. 2130, 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993)

MINNESOTA V. DICKERSON United States Supreme Court 508 U.S. 366, 113 S.Ct. 2130, 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993) MINNESOTA V. DICKERSON United States Supreme Court 508 U.S. 366, 113 S.Ct. 2130, 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993) In this case, the Supreme Court considers whether the seizure of contraband detected through a police

More information

Section: 2.310, Page 1 of 10 Effective: August 5, 2011 Reissued: 08/25/16. Towson University Police Department Manual of General Directives

Section: 2.310, Page 1 of 10 Effective: August 5, 2011 Reissued: 08/25/16. Towson University Police Department Manual of General Directives Section: 2.310, Page 1 of 10 2.310 EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION These directives are adapted from the Maryland Police Training Commission s eyewitness identification model policy. See also Public Safety (PS)

More information

CASE NO. 1D Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and Glenna Joyce Reeves, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

CASE NO. 1D Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and Glenna Joyce Reeves, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA DAVID L. McKIBBEN, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D10-1011

More information

When used in this directive, the following terms shall have the meanings designated:

When used in this directive, the following terms shall have the meanings designated: GENERAL ORDER DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Subject Police-Citizen Contacts, Stops, and Frisks Topic Series Number OPS 304 10 Effective Date August 30, 2013 Replaces: General Order 304.10 (Police-Citizen Contacts,

More information

BAIL' 10! THE'DECISION'TO'PROSECUTE'AND'THE'PREFTRIAL'PROCESS' 11! PUBLIC'ORDER'OFFENCES' 12!

BAIL' 10! THE'DECISION'TO'PROSECUTE'AND'THE'PREFTRIAL'PROCESS' 11! PUBLIC'ORDER'OFFENCES' 12! 1 POLICE'POWERS' 4! POWERS'OF'ENTRY' 4! REQUESTING'IDENTITY' 4! SEARCH'AND'SEIZURE'POWERS'WITHOUT'WARRANT' 4! GENERALLY! 4! SEARCHES!OF!PERSONS!ARRESTED!OR!IN!CUSTODY! 4! FRISK!SEARCHES! 5! STRIP!SEARCHES!

More information

CITY OF ONALASKA POLICE DEPARTMENT

CITY OF ONALASKA POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY OF ONALASKA POLICE DEPARTMENT Policy: Arrest Procedures Policy # 17 Pages: 13 Approved by F & P Committee: 04/02/11 Approved by Common Council: 04/08/11 Initial Issue Date: 01/31/98 Revised dates:

More information

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE S. BERNARD GOODWYN CHRISTOPHER SHAWN ROBERTSON April 18, 2008 FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE S. BERNARD GOODWYN CHRISTOPHER SHAWN ROBERTSON April 18, 2008 FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA PRESENT: All the Justices COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA v. Record No. 071419 OPINION BY JUSTICE S. BERNARD GOODWYN CHRISTOPHER SHAWN ROBERTSON April 18, 2008 FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA In this case,

More information

Arrest, Search, and Seizure

Arrest, Search, and Seizure Criminal Law for Paralegals: Chapter 2 Introduction Tab Text Chapter 2 Arrest, Search, and Seizure Introduction This chapter addresses arrests, searches, and seizures. Both arrests and search warrants

More information

STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : BROWN COUNTY. vs. Case No. 12 CF BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : BROWN COUNTY. vs. Case No. 12 CF BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : BROWN COUNTY STATE OF WISCONSIN, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 12 CF 000000 JOHN DOE, Defendant. BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE THE DEFENDANT, John Doe,

More information

MINNESOTA v. DICKERSON 113 S.Ct (1993) United States Supreme Court

MINNESOTA v. DICKERSON 113 S.Ct (1993) United States Supreme Court Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice Volume 1 Issue 1 Article 19 Spring 4-1-1995 MINNESOTA v. DICKERSON 113 S.Ct. 2130 (1993) United States Supreme Court Follow this and additional

More information

INVESTIGATIVE ENCOUNTERS AT A GLANCE COMMAND LEVEL TRAINING CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 2015 COURTESY PROFESSIONALISM RESPECT

INVESTIGATIVE ENCOUNTERS AT A GLANCE COMMAND LEVEL TRAINING CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 2015 COURTESY PROFESSIONALISM RESPECT INVESTIGATIVE ENCOUNTERS AT A GLANCE COURTESY COMMAND LEVEL TRAINING CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 2015 PROFESSIONALISM RESPECT NOTES INVESTIGATIVE ENCOUNTERS U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION IN TERRY v. OHIO (1968)

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION January 17, 2008 9:00 a.m. v No. 269250 Washtenaw Circuit Court MICHAEL WILLIAM MUNGO, LC No. 05-001221-FH

More information

As Introduced. 132nd General Assembly Regular Session S. B. No Senator Eklund A B I L L

As Introduced. 132nd General Assembly Regular Session S. B. No Senator Eklund A B I L L 132nd General Assembly Regular Session S. B. No. 138 2017-2018 Senator Eklund A B I L L To amend section 2933.32 of the Revised Code to authorize a corrections officer to cause a body cavity search to

More information

POLICE TRAFFIC STOPS & HOW SHOULD YOU ACT? WHAT ARE YOUR RIGHTS. Special Report Handling A Police Traffic Stop

POLICE TRAFFIC STOPS & HOW SHOULD YOU ACT? WHAT ARE YOUR RIGHTS. Special Report Handling A Police Traffic Stop POLICE TRAFFIC STOPS WHAT ARE YOUR RIGHTS & HOW SHOULD YOU ACT? Special Report Handling A Police Traffic Stop Know your rights When can your car be searched? How to conduct yourself during a traffic stop

More information

SEARCH AND SEIZURE: CAN THEY DO THAT?

SEARCH AND SEIZURE: CAN THEY DO THAT? SEARCH AND SEIZURE: CAN THEY DO THAT? ANSWERING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT QUESTION Craig Mastantuono Mastantuono Law Office, SC Author s Note: This outline was distributed at a presentation by Attorney Craig

More information

No. 46,522-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *

No. 46,522-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * * Judgment rendered September 21, 2011. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 922, La. C.Cr.P. No. 46,522-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * *

More information

Detentions And Photographing Detainees

Detentions And Photographing Detainees Policy 440 Detentions And Photographing Detainees 440.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for conducting field interviews (FI) and patdown searches, and the taking

More information

The Fourth Amendment places certain restrictions on when and how searches and seizures

The Fourth Amendment places certain restrictions on when and how searches and seizures Handout 1.4: Search Me in Public General Fourth Amendment Information The Fourth Amendment places certain restrictions on when and how searches and seizures can be conducted. The Fourth Amendment only

More information

Searches Conducted by Public School Officials under the Fourth Amendment

Searches Conducted by Public School Officials under the Fourth Amendment Searches Conducted by Public School Officials under the Fourth Amendment 4 th Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches

More information

CONTRABAND CONTROL AND SEARCHES

CONTRABAND CONTROL AND SEARCHES DESCHUTES COUNTY ADULT JAIL CD-8-8 L. Shane Nelson, Sheriff Jail Operations Approved by: December 29, 2017 POLICY. CONTRABAND CONTROL AND SEARCHES It is the policy of the Deschutes County Sheriff s Office

More information

California Supreme Court Creates a New Exception to the Search Warrant Requirement: People v. Sirhan

California Supreme Court Creates a New Exception to the Search Warrant Requirement: People v. Sirhan SMU Law Review Volume 27 1973 California Supreme Court Creates a New Exception to the Search Warrant Requirement: People v. Sirhan James N. Cowden Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/smulr

More information

DEFINITIONS. Accuse To bring a formal charge against a person, to the effect that he is guilty of a crime or punishable offense.

DEFINITIONS. Accuse To bring a formal charge against a person, to the effect that he is guilty of a crime or punishable offense. DEFINITIONS Words and Phrases The following words and phrases have the meanings indicated when used in this chapter according to Black s Law Dictionary, common dictionary, and/or are distinctive to law

More information

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Supreme Court of Louisiana Supreme Court of Louisiana FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 3 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 21st day of January, 2009, are as follows: PER CURIAM: 2008-KK-1002

More information

RESTRAINTS ON PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE: Arizona v. Hicks* HISTORY OF THE PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE

RESTRAINTS ON PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE: Arizona v. Hicks* HISTORY OF THE PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE RESTRAINTS ON PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE: Arizona v. Hicks* I. INTRODUCTION Before criticizing President Reagan's recent nominations of conservative judges to the Supreme Court, one should note a recent Supreme

More information

POLICE AND THE LAW USE OF FORCE

POLICE AND THE LAW USE OF FORCE POLICE AND THE LAW USE OF FORCE OBJECTIVE BASIS Allows for informal decision making BUT Formal requirements of the U.S. Constitution Controls formal criminal justice process Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth

More information

Circuit Court for Baltimore City Case No UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2018

Circuit Court for Baltimore City Case No UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2018 Circuit Court for Baltimore City Case No. 118059004 UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 968 September Term, 2018 PATRICK HOWELL v. STATE OF MARYLAND Friedman, Beachley, Moylan, Charles

More information

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS. Judgment Rendered June

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS. Judgment Rendered June STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2007 KA 2009 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS ll n MATTHEW G L CONWAY Judgment Rendered June 6 2008 Appealed from the 18th Judicial District Court In and for

More information

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PAROLE DIVISION

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PAROLE DIVISION TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PAROLE DIVISION NUMBER: PD/POP-3.6.10 DATE: 12/04/12 POLICY AND OPERATING PROCEDURE PAGE: 1 of 6 SUPERSEDES: 09/12/07 SUBJECT: SPECIAL CONDITION X SEARCH GUIDELINES

More information

Video Course Evaluation Form. Atty ID number for Pennsylvania: Name of Course You Just Watched

Video Course Evaluation Form. Atty ID number for Pennsylvania: Name of Course You Just Watched Garden State CLE 21 Winthrop Road Lawrenceville, New Jersey 08648 (609) 895-0046 fax- 609-895-1899 Atty2starz@aol.com Video Course Evaluation Form Attorney Name Atty ID number for Pennsylvania: Name of

More information

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellant : JOURNAL ENTRY. vs.

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellant : JOURNAL ENTRY. vs. [Cite as State v. Ely, 2006-Ohio-459.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No. 86091 STATE OF OHIO, Plaintiff-Appellant JOURNAL ENTRY vs. AND KEITH ELY, OPINION Defendant-Appellee

More information

Victoria Police Manual

Victoria Police Manual General Category Operations Topic Searches Victoria Police Manual VPM Instruction 105-1 Searches of persons Originally Issued 11/07/03 Last Updated 08/01/07 Update History 1. Policy Police members have

More information

DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT

DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT Policy 7.5 Search Warrants Effective Date: 05/01/15 Replaces: 2-2 Approved: Ivan Barkley Chief of Police Reference: N/A I. POLICY The Federal and State Constitutions guarantee

More information

STATE V. GANT: DEPARTING FROM THE BRIGHT-LINE BELTON RULE IN AUTOMOBILE SEARCHES INCIDENT TO ARREST

STATE V. GANT: DEPARTING FROM THE BRIGHT-LINE BELTON RULE IN AUTOMOBILE SEARCHES INCIDENT TO ARREST STATE V. GANT: DEPARTING FROM THE BRIGHT-LINE BELTON RULE IN AUTOMOBILE SEARCHES INCIDENT TO ARREST Holly Wells INTRODUCTION In State v. Gant, 1 the Arizona Supreme Court, in a 3 to 2 decision, held that

More information

STATE V. GUTIERREZ, 2004-NMCA-081, 136 N.M. 18, 94 P.3d 18 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DEMETRIO DANIEL GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

STATE V. GUTIERREZ, 2004-NMCA-081, 136 N.M. 18, 94 P.3d 18 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DEMETRIO DANIEL GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant. 1 STATE V. GUTIERREZ, 2004-NMCA-081, 136 N.M. 18, 94 P.3d 18 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DEMETRIO DANIEL GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 23,047 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO

More information

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed September 24, 2014. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D10-3264 Lower Tribunal No. 06-1071 K Omar Ricardo

More information

2017 Case Law Update

2017 Case Law Update 2017 Case Law Update A 17-102 04/24/2017 Fourth Amendment: Detention based on taking an individual's driver license People v. Linn (2015) 241 Cal. App. 4th 46 Rule: An officer's taking of a voluntarily

More information

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST WARRANTLESS COLLECTION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION FROM CELL PHONES DEEMED UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST WARRANTLESS COLLECTION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION FROM CELL PHONES DEEMED UNCONSTITUTIONAL. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST WARRANTLESS COLLECTION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION FROM CELL PHONES DEEMED UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (2014). 1 STEWART JAMES ALVIS In

More information

TRAINING OBJECTIVES. Review Search & Seizure Law Relating To Probation/Parole. Describe the Plain View Doctrine

TRAINING OBJECTIVES. Review Search & Seizure Law Relating To Probation/Parole. Describe the Plain View Doctrine TRAINING OBJECTIVES Review Search & Seizure Law Relating To Probation/Parole Describe the Plain View Doctrine Discuss the Composition and Imposition of Search Conditions 1 TRAINING OBJECTIVES Describe

More information

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. Nos. 00-CF-65 & 00-CF-893 TYRONE TRICE, APPELLANT, UNITED STATES,

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. Nos. 00-CF-65 & 00-CF-893 TYRONE TRICE, APPELLANT, UNITED STATES, Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections

More information

5 Officer Schenk also testified that, after he brought Heaven to the office, the loss prevention officer immediately returned to Heaven s shopping

5 Officer Schenk also testified that, after he brought Heaven to the office, the loss prevention officer immediately returned to Heaven s shopping 1a APPENDIX A COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 14CA0961 El Paso County District Court No. 13CR4796 Honorable David S. Prince, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee,

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as State v. Maddox, 2013-Ohio-1544.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 98484 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. ADRIAN D. MADDOX

More information

JAMES L. WETZEL Chief of Police. Law Incident Records Management Procedures for Officers and Detectives.

JAMES L. WETZEL Chief of Police. Law Incident Records Management Procedures for Officers and Detectives. CASPER POLICE DEPARTMENT City of Casper, Wyoming JAMES L. WETZEL 201 North David Street 1 st Floor Casper, Wyoming 82601 4 January 2017 Department Procedure 17-01 FROM: SUBJECT: Law Incident Records Management

More information

Submitted May 10, 2017 Decided July 26, Remanded by Supreme Court September 12, Resubmitted December 11, 2018 Decided January 14, 2019

Submitted May 10, 2017 Decided July 26, Remanded by Supreme Court September 12, Resubmitted December 11, 2018 Decided January 14, 2019 NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO. : O P I N I O N - vs - 11/9/2009 :

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO. : O P I N I O N - vs - 11/9/2009 : [Cite as State v. Moore, 2009-Ohio-5927.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO PREBLE COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2009-02-005 : O P I N I O N - vs - 11/9/2009

More information

BALTIMORE CITY SCHOOLS Baltimore School Police Force STOP AND FRISK

BALTIMORE CITY SCHOOLS Baltimore School Police Force STOP AND FRISK STOP AND FRISK This Directive contains the following numbered sections: I. Directive II. Purpose III. Definitions IV. Background V. General VI. Required Actions VII. Effective Date I. DIRECTIVE It is the

More information

THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT

THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT Subject: Limits of Authority Page No: 1 THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER Authority: Chief of Police Subject: Limits of Authority Date Issued: January 15, 2014 Gregory L. Eyler Effective Date: January

More information

No. 42,089-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * * * * * * *

No. 42,089-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * * * * * * * Judgment rendered June 20, 2007. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 922, La. C.Cr.P. No. 42,089-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * STATE

More information

Searches, Seizures, and Disposition of Property

Searches, Seizures, and Disposition of Property Army Regulation 190 22 Military Police Searches, Seizures, and Disposition of Property Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 1 January 1983 Unclassified SUMMARY of CHANGE AR 190 22 Searches,

More information

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SEARCH AND SEIZURE LAW. By Hon. Barry Kamins. Kings County Criminal Bar Association March 31, 2010

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SEARCH AND SEIZURE LAW. By Hon. Barry Kamins. Kings County Criminal Bar Association March 31, 2010 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SEARCH AND SEIZURE LAW By Hon. Barry Kamins Kings County Criminal Bar Association March 31, 2010 1 I. GENERAL FOURTH AMENDMENT PRINCIPLES A. Probable Cause 1) An exchange of an unidentified

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO [Cite as State v. Mobley, 2014-Ohio-4410.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO. 26044 v. : T.C. NO. 13CR2518/1 13CR2518/2 CAMERON MOBLEY

More information

Marquette University Police Department

Marquette University Police Department Marquette University Police Department Policy and Procedure Manual Policy: 4.2 Issued: May 1, 2015 Date Revised: N/A WILEAG Standards: 1.6.1, 1.7.4, 1.7.5, 1.7.6 IACLEA Standards: 2.2.2, 2.2.3 4.2.00 Purpose

More information

Constitutional Law - Search and Seizure - Hot Pursuit

Constitutional Law - Search and Seizure - Hot Pursuit Louisiana Law Review Volume 28 Number 3 The Work of the Louisiana Appellate Courts for the 1966-1967 Term: A Symposium April 1968 Constitutional Law - Search and Seizure - Hot Pursuit Dan E. Melichar Repository

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as State v. Geiter, 190 Ohio App.3d 541, 2010-Ohio-6017.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 94015 The STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v.

More information