Section: 2.310, Page 1 of 10 Effective: August 5, 2011 Reissued: 08/25/16. Towson University Police Department Manual of General Directives
|
|
- Bruce Osborne
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Section: 2.310, Page 1 of EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION These directives are adapted from the Maryland Police Training Commission s eyewitness identification model policy. See also Public Safety (PS) & Eyewitness Identifications Generally A. Identification processes must be conducted fairly, reliably, and objectively. B. The facts, circumstances, and details of every show-up, photo array, line-up, voice identification, etc. will be included in police reports of the related incidents. This information includes, but is not limited to: 1. Dates, times, and locations of the procedures; 2. The names of all persons involved (police and citizens); 3. The instructions that were given by officers to witnesses; 4. Reactions by witnesses and/or statements in their own words about the identification procedure and certainty of their identifications or nonidentifications. C. When multiple witnesses are involved: 1. Separate witnesses and tell them to avoid discussing details of the incident with other witnesses; 2. If a positive identification is obtained from one witness, conduct further identification processes using photo arrays or line-ups for any remaining witnesses; D. Caution witnesses that the persons they are looking at may or may not be the suspects. E. Avoid saying anything to the witness that may influence their selection. F. Officers will not state or suggest that suspects have been arrested, booked, or have made any confessions, incriminating statements, or that incriminating evidence has been found. G. Other than thanking witnesses for their assistance, do not give feedback to witnesses after identification processes. H. A suspect s right to have counsel present during identification procedures: 1. Does not apply when suspects are not physically present such as procedures involving photographs, sketches, or composites whether or not criminal proceedings have started; 2. Does not apply during in-person identification procedures if complaints have been filed or charging documents obtained, but suspects have not been taken into custody; and 3. Does apply to when suspects have been arraigned or indicted Show-ups (Field Identifications) A. When circumstances require the prompt display of subjects to witnesses, such as when officers locate potential suspects within close time and location proximity to crime locations or in exigent circumstances, such as the near death of available witnesses, officers should: 1. Conduct these processes live rather than by using photographs; 2. Determine and document suspect descriptions before show-ups; 3. Transport witnesses to where suspects are detained; 4. Position suspects so that they are not in police vehicles and handcuffs, if any, are not visible to witnesses; 5. Not bring suspects into crime scenes nor have clothing or other articles recovered from crime scenes placed on or near suspects to prevent contaminating evidence and suspects B. Officers may take victims and witnesses in police vehicles to canvas areas where crimes just occurred so they may attempt to point out suspects. C. Suspects who are not positively identified will be promptly released and allowed to leave unless other evidence is obtained to establish probable cause. The personal identification information of everyone detained for show-ups must be included in related police reports.
2 Section: 2.310, Page 2 of Photo Arrays ( ){Revised: 08/08/16) A. The investigations unit may assist in coordinating and/or facilitating photo arrays. Photo sources include, but are not limited to departmental, Auxiliary Services (OneCards), and Maryland MVA (driver s licenses), and allied agencies. B. Officers who prepare photo arrays: 1. Should ensure they are shown to witnesses as soon as possible after crimes have been committed and actual or probable suspects have been developed; 2. Will use a separate array for each suspect; and 3. Will include only one suspect and a minimum of five non-suspect filler photos. a. Suspect photos should closely depict their appearance at the times of incidents. b Filler photos should generally fit suspects descriptions without being so close a match that people who are familiar with suspects would have difficulty distinguishing the fillers. c. Photos will not bear markings indicating previous arrests. d. There must be a consistent appearance between suspect and filler photos with respect to any unique or unusual features such as facial scars or injuries by adding or covering the features, but without altering photos. e. Officers will examine an assembled array to ensure that nothing about the suspect s photo makes it stand out. f. Fillers will not be reused and shown to the same witness for different suspects. g. Each photo will be placed and attached in its own folder that is numbered only on the inside. C. When showing photo arrays: 1. AN INVESTIGATING officer develops the array, shuffles the folders so the officer does not know the photo order, and presents the photos one at a time so the witness sees only one photo at a time and the officer cannot see which photo is being viewed. 2. Investigating and/or secondary officers will ensure that witnesses are read the appropriate instructions from the Witness Identification Instructions (UPO.131.D) and have witnesses sign to acknowledge the instructions; 3. Officers will remind witnesses that all photos in the array must be viewed even if witnesses make an identification before all photos have been seen; 4. Officers may reshow an array once if witnesses do not initially make an identification and believe that viewing arrays a second time may be helpful; 5. Witnesses should be asked to state in their own words and without using a numerical scale, just how certain they are about any identifications they make; 6. Separate arrays will be used for each witness; and 7. They will be preserved as when they were presented and submitted consistent with Property and Evidence. Copies may be placed in investigative files for reference purposes Lineups ( ) A. Lineups will be coordinated through the investigations unit supervisor, with consultation by the Office of the State s Attorney, and with the assistance of allied agencies that have the resources to conduct lineups. B. Officers will request that allied agencies use a blind, sequential process similar to that described in except that this process uses an actual suspect and others as fillers. The process should be compliant with Public Safety (PS) & C. Other factors that should be considered when conducting lineups include, but are not limited to: 1. Suspects cannot be detained and compelled to participate in lineups without probable cause to arrest; 2. The Office of the State s Attorney can apply for court orders that compel suspects to cooperate;
3 Section: 2.310, Page 3 of Suspects who have been arraigned or indicted must be informed, preferably in writing, of their right to have legal counsel present during lineups; 4. Suspects attorneys: a. May make reasonable suggestions about the lineup composition and how it is conducted. This information will be included in the corresponding police report; b. Will be given sufficient time to confer with clients; c. May observe, but may not talk with lineup participants or witnesses; d. Must leave the room before the lineup starts. e. Must go through the Office of the State s Attorney to get names and addresses of witnesses who participate in lineups if their clients have not been arraigned or arraigned or indicted; 5. Lineup participants may be directed to wear certain clothing, to put on or take off certain clothing, to take certain positions or walk or move in a certain way. Clothing must be sized so that it does not fit only the suspect. All participants must be asked to perform the same actions; 6. Participants must not speak during lineups because voice identification procedures must be conducted separately consistent with ; and 7. Suspects who have been arrested may be required to participate in lineups, but may lawfully refuse if they have a post-arraignment or indictment right to have counsel present and their attorneys are not present through no fault of suspects or the attorneys Voice Identification A. Voice identifications will be coordinated through the investigations unit supervisor with consultation by the Office of the State s Attorney. B. When conducting voice identification processes: 1. There should be one suspect and at least five fillers whose voices will be listened to by witnesses; 2. Fillers should not be known to officers who administer the process; 3. Suspects and fillers will not be visible to witnesses; 4. All participants will be told to say the same words, in the same order, and in a neutral tone. The words will not be the same that were said by suspects during crimes; and 5. Witnesses will be told, and officers conducting the processes will ensure, that the persons will be presented in different order when lineups and voice identifications are conducted Courtroom Identifications A. Officers should consult with the Office of the State s Attorney before conducting any courtroom identification processes. B. Suspects who have been arraigned or indicted have the right to counsel during courtroom identification processes Sketches & Composites A. Sketches made by trained artists are preferred over composites. B. Officers should document witnesses full descriptions of suspects before sketches or composites are made. C. Identifications by sketch or composite should not be attempted if photo arrays or lineups are available. D. A person s mere resemblance to a sketch or composite does not establish probable cause to make an arrest. E. Original sketches and composites must be preserved as evidence. Copies may be made and distributed as needed for investigative purposes Booking Photos A. Officers should not use this process unless other investigative avenues have been exhausted. B. When showing booking photos, officers should: 1. Remove photos of people not likely involved in the incident to narrow the pool of photos as much as possible; 2. Record the names of everyone whose photos were viewed by witnesses;
4 Section: 2.310, Page 4 of Remove or hide any information on the photos that may unfairly or improperly influence witnesses; 4. Ensure the folders contain only one photo of each person and that the photos are reasonably current; 5. Use several photos of each format if various photo formats are used; 6. Let witnesses look at a number of photos before making any selection; and 7. Not call attention to any particular photo AIDS FOR DETECTING DECEPTION (42.2.6) A. The agency authorizes the use of polygraphs and computerized voice stress analyzers (CVSAs) as aids for detecting deception in criminal and administrative investigations as permitted by law. B. Polygraph and CVSA examiners: 1. Must be graduates of institutions that provide training for the respective instruments; and 2. Will conduct examinations consistent with the training and ethics of their respective professional organizations. C. Officers will submit requests for polygraph or CVSA exams through their chains of command to obtain approval and coordination. D. Juveniles will not be examined unless at least one parent, legal guardian, or juvenile court judge has granted written permission. E. Examinations will not be conducted when examinations are contraindicated by medical conditions or subjects are under the influence of alcohol, drugs, etc. F. Except when there is reasonable belief to believe alleged victims of sex offenses are filing false reports in violation of CR False Statement to Law Enforcement Officer, the agency will not, as prohibited in 42 USC 3796gg: 1. Ask or require victims of sexual offenses to submit to polygraph or other truth verification device examinations as a condition for proceeding with case investigations; or 2. Refuse to investigate, charge, or assist in the prosecution of alleged sexual offenses if victims refuse to submit to polygraph or other truth verification device examinations TASK FORCES (42.2.5) A. The Chief may authorize officers to be members of long-term, multi-jurisdictional investigative task forces. B. Before officers are assigned to investigative task forces, directives must be in place addressing matters that include, but are not limited to: 1. Task force purpose; 2. Defining authority, responsibilities, and written agreements; and 3. Evaluating results and the need for continued operations LIMITS ON DISCRETION (1.1.3, 1.2.6, 1.2.7) {Revised: 08/23/16} A. Officers will affirmatively support the filing of criminal charges by victims when on-view arrests are not made, but victims or officers could apply for charges through district court commissioners. TO FACILITATE THIS PROCESS, OF- FICERS WILL: 1. Distribute How to File a Criminal Complaint in the District Court of Maryland (DC/CR 1BR) to crime victims; and 2. Assist victims with applying for criminal charges when possible, such as completing Applications for Statement of Charges on behalf of victims, taking victims to the commissioner s office, etc. B. OFFICERS WILL ENSURE THAT DISCRETIONARY PROSECUTION DECISIONS ARE MADE ETHICALLY AND FREE OF ANY IMPROPER BIAS. Officers may apply a limited amount of discretion ONLY in misdemeanor or code violation situations that are: 1. ALCOHOL AND MARIJUANA RELATED VIOLA- TIONS COMMITTED BY TOWSON UNIVERSITY STUDENTS AS SPECIFIED IN SUB- STANCE ABUSE AND DRUG EN- FORCEMENT RESPECTIVELY; OR
5 Section: 2.310, Page 5 of When officers could make on-view arrests or apply for charging documents, but reasons exist outside the control of law enforcement that precludes arresting, charging, and prosecuting offenders, such as when: a. Restitution has already been made or will be obtained administratively by the university; or b. Victims do not want to cooperate with investigations or criminal prosecutions. C. COMMANDERS MAY ORDER INVESTIGATIONS BE CONTINUED IN ORDER TO POSSIBLY BRING SUS- PECTS TO JUSTICE THROUGH OTHER MEANS EVEN IF VICTIMS DO NOT WANT TO COOPERATE WITH INVESTIGATIONS OR CRIMINAL PROSECU- TIONS. D. OFFICERS HAVE AN AFFIRMATIVE, LAW EN- FORCEMENT OBLIGATION TO TAKE LAW EN- FORCEMENT ACTIONS IN ALL SITUATIONS NOT LISTED IN B. UNLESS ARTICULABLE, COMPEL- LING REASONS EXIST TO FORGO LAW ENFORCE- MENT ACTIONS AND APPROVAL IS GRANTED BY THEIR SUPERVISOR AND COMMANDER. 1. AN OFFICER WHO WANTS TO FORGO LAW EN- FORCEMENT ACTIONS AGAINST SUSPECTS MUST COMPLETE A DISCRETION REQUEST (UPO.134.D) FOR EACH SUSPECT FOR WHOM DISCRETION IS BEING REQUESTED. DISCRETION TO FORGO LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS WILL BE ALLOWED ONLY IF AP- PROVED BY THE OFFICER S SUPERVISOR AND COMMANDER. 2. VERBAL PERMISSION TO FORGO LAW EN- FORCEMENT ACTIONS IN TIME CRITICAL SIT- UATIONS MAY BE SOUGHT VERBALLY THROUGH THE OFFICER S SUPERVISOR AND: A. COMMANDER DURING NORMAL BUSI- NESS HOURS; OR B. THE DUTY OFFICER DURING NON-BUSI- NESS HOURS. 3. VERBAL PERMISSION TO FORGO LAW EN- FORCEMENT ACTIONS MUST BE PROMPTLY FOLLOWED UP BY REQUESTING OFFICERS COMPLETING AND SUBMITTING DISCRETION REQUESTS THROUGH THEIR CHAIN OF COM- MAND COLD CASE INVESTIGATIONS (42.2.9) {Revised: 11/13/14} A. Cold cases are generally felonies or crimes of violence that have not been solved after at least one year, have not passed any statutes of limitations, and have been suspended from further regular investigation. These cases may be reactivated by the Chief, a commander, or the investigations supervisor when: 1. Initial investigative files are available; and 2. New information or evidence is received or possibly available that would impact the status of the case and has the potential to lead to its closure; or 3. A routine or specific review of unsolved cases is completed and: a. Fresh investigative insights are developed by reviewing case files; or b. Having existing evidence reexamined through new or improved technology may produce new leads. B. Re-opened cold cases will be conducted and documented consistent with Follow-up Investigations. C. Other criteria that should be considered when conducting cold case investigations include, but are not limited to: 1. Legal considerations such as the application or expansion of statutes of limitations; 2. Technology such as the nature and condition of the evidence and the advancement of new technologies in solving crimes; 3. The availability of victims, witnesses, and suspects; and 4. Resource considerations such as time, money, and personnel SEARCH WARRANTS (IALCEA 2.2.4) {Effective: 11/13/14} A. Officers will attempt to obtain search and seizure warrants in situations where warrantless searches are not allowed. B. Criminal Procedure (CP) contains statutes relevant to the application, issuance, service, etc. of search warrants. C. See also Investigative Guide Search Warrant (UPO.094.D).
6 Section: 2.310, Page 6 of Application A. Officers who believe that obtaining search warrants are necessary during investigations must obtain initial approval of their immediate supervisor and commander or the Duty Officer during non-business hours before proceeding. B. A commander may request assistance and / or review from the MD Office of the Attorney General or the Office of the State s Attorney during search warrant related investigations. C. The original and two copies of completed affidavit and search warrant must be presented to a judge of competent jurisdiction for review and approval Service A. The Chief or Deputy Chief will designate a commander on a case-by-case basis to oversee the application and service of any search warrant. B. The duties and responsibilities of the commander overseeing the service of a search warrant includes, but is not limited to ensuring: 1. All search warrant related activities are documented in initial and supplemental agency reports and as otherwise described in this directive; 2. The case is deconflicted if necessary through MCAC, allied agencies, etc.; 3. Any necessary allied agency assistance is requested for help with entering the location and serving the warrant; and 4. A commander or supervisor oversees and manages execution of the search warrant. C. The duties and responsibilities of the commander or supervisor overseeing and managing search warrant execution includes, but is not limited to ensuring: 1. A written operation plan is established, approved, and used to brief all involved personnel: 2. The appropriate type of entry (knock and announce v. no knock) and method of entry (non-forced, forced, or high risk) is selected and approved; 3. One officer is designated as the seizing officer who is responsible for the actual seizing of all evidence. a. Other officers may be designated to assist in locating evidence, but the seizing officer will coordinate and document all evidence that is being seized. b. No one will enter the search area without the permission of the seizing officer. c. A written record will be kept of each person entering the search area. See also Incident Scene Access Registry (UPO.038.D); 4. All participating police officers are clearly identifiable as police officers (uniforms, badges, raid jackets labeled POLICE, etc.) and wearing body armor; 5. Once entry is made, all occupants are gathered into one area that has been cleared for safety and evidence concerns; 6. All persons are identified and wanted checks conducted; 7. Officers conduct pat-downs of anyone for which an articulable, reasonable belief exists that the person may possess a weapon; 8. Officers search anyone who: a. Is arrested; b. Is named in the search warrant as one who is to be searched; or c. Consents to being searched; 9. People are detained only as long as necessary to verify their identities and whether or not there is probable cause for their arrest; 10. Photographs are taken of areas to be searched before and after the search is conducted; 11. Property is not unnecessarily damaged, disturbed, soiled, etc. Damaged areas will be photographed; 12. The seizing officer documents all items seized consistent with Property & Evidence, completes the search warrant return, and leaves copies of the inventory, warrant, application and supporting affidavit with the person from whom the property was taken or left in a conspicuous place where it is reasonably protected from loss or damage if an owner/agent is not present. However, only a warrant copy will be left if the affidavit is sealed;
7 Section: 2.310, Page 7 of All evidence, including photographs, is promptly submitted consistent with Property & Evidence; 14. The served search warrant, its return, and inventory are submitted to the issuing or designated judge not later than 10 days after the warrant was served Non-Premises Search Warrants A. Search warrants for vehicles, motor homes, garages, electronic devices, or handwriting or other physical evidence from persons do not require written operation plans, but specific duties should be assigned and reviewed by the overseeing supervisor or commander. B. For search situations involving people, officers: 1. May seek to obtain search warrants when they believe subjects have on their persons items subject to seizure; 2. May obtain court orders to compel subjects provide exemplars for comparison; and 3. May enter a premises under the same circumstances, in the same manner, and use reasonable force as allowed for the execution of any other search warrant Assisting Allied Agencies Notifications that allied agencies plan to serve search warrants on university property must be promptly referred to the commander responsible for the investigations function, investigations commander, during business hours or the Duty Officer during non-business hours. This commander will: A. Confirm that warrants have been authorized by a court of competent jurisdiction and have not expired; B. Determine and arrange for the assignment of appropriate resources and assistance; and C. Ensure a police report is completed that contains information including, but not limited to: 1. Name of the allied agency and its on-scene representative; 2. Nature of the offense; 3. Names and roles of all employees from this agency who participated in the event; and 4. Identification information for everyone who was detained, searched, or arrested during the execution of the search warrant WARRANTLESS SEARCH & SEIZURE (1.2.4) A. Officers will conduct warrantless searches and seizures consistent with Constitutional provisions, case law, and statutes. B. Officers may also attempt to obtain search and seizure warrants in situations where warrantless searches are not allowed Consent Searches A. Consent searches are considered by the courts to be legitimate, but not the best method for legitimizing searches. B. Silence in response to requests for consent searches is not considered to be affirmative answers. C. When attempting to conduct consent searches, particularly of rooms, offices, or other building spaces, officers will: 1. Ensure persons giving consent to search have valid, lawful authority to give that consent; 2. Not make any threats or inducements to secure consent searches; 3. Ask for consent and must reasonably believe that consent was given clearly, voluntarily, and of free will; 4. Unless exigent circumstances exist, document the consent by having persons who grant consent execute Consent to Search (UPO.056.D) forms; 5. Inform and get the approval of the on-duty patrol supervisor or a commander; and 6. Complete related reports regardless if consent was obtained or searches were conducted. D. It is unusual for officers to need or attempt to conduct consent searches in circumstances described in through If consent searches are attempted outside the criteria given in those sections, the process of attempting to gain consent, citizens responses, and documenting the information will be consistent with A. through C. of this section Stop & Frisk (Terry Stops) A. When officers observe unusual conduct that leads them reasonably to conclude in light of their experience that criminal activity may be afoot, officers may:
8 Section: 2.310, Page 8 of Briefly stop suspicious persons; 2. Make reasonable inquiries aimed at confirming or dispelling their suspicions; and 3. When justified by believing that the individuals whose suspicious activities they are investigating at close range are armed and presently dangerous to officers or others, conduct pat-down searches to determine if the persons are in fact carrying weapons. B. Stops and frisks usually involve ongoing criminal conduct, but officers are permitted to stop and, when appropriate, frisk persons suspected of being involved in crimes. 1. The purpose of frisks or limited searches is to allow officers to pursue their investigations without fear of harm or violence. 2. Stops and frisks must be based on specific, objective, and articulable facts and logical conclusions from which officers experiences enable them to develop reasonable suspicion. 3. Officers may use information from sources other than their own personal observations on which to initiate stops and frisks. 4. Frisks are no more than limited searches of the outer clothing in attempt to discover weapons. 5. Officers who reasonably suspect that motorists are dangerous and may gain control of weapons in vehicles may conduct brief, limited searches in areas limited to where weapons might be placed or hidden. 6. Items that are not reasonably believed to be weapons or clearly identifiable as contraband cannot be removed from persons clothing during stops and frisks. 7. Stops and frisks should be conducted in well-lighted areas and with other officers present in order to afford maximum protection unless the exigency of circumstances dictates otherwise Vehicle Searches A. This section provides general, but not exhaustive guidelines for searching vehicles in certain circumstances. B. Officers may stop vehicles, and if impractical to obtain warrants, conduct warrantless searches because vehicles could be moved or evidence destroyed before warrants could be obtained. These searches are defined by the objects of the searches and places in vehicles where they may be found (Carroll v. US). C. Officers may search vehicles when they reasonably believe based on articulable facts that people may pose a danger if they were allowed to reenter vehicles. These searches must be limited to passenger compartments where weapons may be placed or hidden (Michigan v. Long). D. Officers with probable cause to believe contraband is concealed in vehicles may conduct warrantless searches by opening locked areas, containers and any other parts of vehicles that may contain objects of the searches. These searches are defined by what is being searched for and places where there is probable cause to believe they may be found (US v. Ross). E. Officers may search containers in vehicles without warrants when they have probable cause to believe these containers may hold contraband or evidence (California v. Acevedo). F. Searches incident to arrest can be made in an arrestee s lunging area, which is an area from where an arrestee might get a weapon or destroy evidence (Chimel v. California). G. Entire vehicle compartments and containers therein may be searched when conducting searches incident to arrest of vehicle occupants (New York v. Belton). H. Vehicle searches incident to arrest may be justified even if occupants have gotten out of vehicles, closed doors, and walked a short distance away before being arrested (Thornton v. US). I. For searches incident to arrest of a vehicle s passenger compartment, officers must articulate: 1. They were unable to sufficiently restrain arrestees during searches so that arrestees may have reasonably accessed vehicles; or 2. Reasonable belief that evidence of the crime for which occupants were arrested may be found during searches of passenger compartments (Arizona v. Gant).
9 Section: 2.310, Page 9 of 10 J. There are many arrestable traffic violations, such as driving suspended, where there is are probably no reasons to believe vehicles contains relevant evidence. Other cases, such as CDS possession, give officers acceptable reasons for searching passenger compartments and containers therein (Arizona v. Gant) Searches at Crime Scenes A. Limited sweeps for other persons may be conducted in homes or premises where lawful arrests have been made if officers reasonably believe there are others present who may pose danger to those on arrest scenes. B. Officers should attempt to obtain search warrants for crime scenes in residences, premises or other similar locations unless exigent circumstances or reasonable expectations exist that evidence may be damaged or destroyed. C. Officers may search and seize property reasonably believed to be abandoned. D. The open field doctrine allows entry and search of unoccupied or undeveloped areas outside the curtilage of dwellings Exigent Circumstances & Emergencies A. Officers may conduct other warrantless searches: 1. Of anything or any place at any time it is reasonably necessary to save lives or prevent injuries; or 2. If they have probable cause to believe that evidence is in places or things to be searched and reason to believe that evidence may be destroyed before warrants can be obtained. B. Protective sweeps of locations such as residence hall suites may be made during arrests if officers reasonably believe there are others present who may pose danger to those on arrest scenes. C. Officers will apply for search warrants if they do not know if exigent circumstances exist to justify warrantless searches Plain Feel The plain feel principle allows officers to lawfully seize any drugs or contraband identified during Terry frisks or limited pat-downs of suspects if the articles are plainly felt and identified by officers acting in good faith.
10 Section: 2.310, Page 10 of 10 Intentionally Blank
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION
POLICY & PROCEDURE NO. 1.12 ISSUE DATE: 11/21/13 EFFECTIVE DATE: 11/21/13 MASSACHUSETTS POLICE ACCREDITATION STANDARDS REFERENCED: 1.2.3, 42.2.3(e), 42.1.11, 42.2.12 REVISION DATE: 08/09/14 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
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
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
DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT
DELMAR POLICE DEPARTMENT Policy 7.42 Eyewitness Identifications Effective Date: 04/06/16 Replaces: 2-14.1 Approved: Ivan Barkley Chief of Police Reference: N/A I. POLICY Eyewitness identification is a
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
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
SECTION: OPERATIONS OPR-229A EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATIONS
SECTION: OPERATIONS OPR-229A CHAPTER: DIRECTIVE: FIELD PROCEDURES 229A.01 PURPOSE To establish a policy for the preparation and presentation of photographic and in-person lineups. 229A.02 DEFINITIONS Lineup
This General Order contains the following numbered sections:
This General Order contains the following numbered sections: I. Directive II. Purpose III. Definition IV. General V. Procedure to Obtain a Search and Seizure Warrant VI. Execution of a Search and Seizure
Identification Procedures
CITY OF MADISON POLICE DEPARTMENT Identification Procedures Eff. Date 05/12/2017 Purpose This outlines procedures to be used for conducting all identification procedures (show-ups, photo arrays and in-person
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
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:
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
Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association LINE-UP AND SHOW-UP PROCEDURES (Eyewitness Identification) MODEL POLICY GENERAL ORDER
Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association LINE-UP AND SHOW-UP PROCEDURES (Eyewitness Identification) MODEL POLICY GENERAL ORDER NUMBER POLICY NAME CALEA STANDARD PAGES 340.10 LINE-UP AND SHOW-UP PROCEDURES
ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
JOSEPH A. FOSTER ATTORNEY GENERAL ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 33 CAPITOL STREET CONCORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE 03301-6397 ANNM. RICE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TO FROM: DATE: RE All Law Enforcement Agencies
.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
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
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
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
East Haven Police Department
East Haven Police Department Type of Directive: Policies & Procedures No. 417.2 Subject/Title: Issue Date: Eye Witness Identification July 29, 2014 Effective Date: References/Attachments: Connecticut Public
Virginia Beach Police Department General Order Chapter 8 - Criminal Investigations
Operational General Order 8.03 Lineups PAGE 1 OF 6 SUBJECT Virginia Beach Police Department General Order Chapter 8 - Criminal Investigations DISTRIBUTION ALL BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE: CALEA:
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
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;
TYPE OF ORDER NUMBER/SERIES ISSUE DATE EFFECTIVE DATE General Order /3/2013 5/5/2013
TYPE OF ORDER NUMBER/SERIES ISSUE DATE EFFECTIVE DATE General Order 360.08 5/3/2013 5/5/2013 SUBJECT TITLE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DATES Eyewitness Identification: Photographic Line-Ups, N/A Physical Line-Ups
Contemporary Issues in Criminal Investigation and Prosecution Working Group EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION Model Policy February 2016
Contemporary Issues in Criminal Investigation and Prosecution Working Group EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION Model Policy February 2016 This policy is intended to allow for the individual needs of law enforcement
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
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)
THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT
Subject: Eyewitness Identification Page No. 1 THURMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER Authority: Chief of Police Subject: Eyewitness Identification Accreditation Standard: Chapter 42 Date Issued: March
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
Search & Seizure Warrants
HARFORD COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE OPERATIONAL POLICY Jeffrey R. Gahler, Sheriff Search & Seizure Warrants Distribution: All Personnel Index: OPS 1503 Responsible Unit: Criminal Investigations Division Rescinds:
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES
The Allegheny County Chiefs of Police Association EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES An Allegheny A County Criminal Justice Advisory Board Project In Partnership With The Allegheny County District Attorney
Police Ride Alongs. In This Issue: Photograph Lineup. Pedestrian Infraction. Marijuana Odor on a Person
A Newsletter for the Criminal Justice Community Police Ride Alongs In This Issue: Photograph Lineup Pedestrian Infraction Marijuana Odor on a Person Legal Eagle Published by: Legal Eagle Services West
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
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION MODEL POLICY
EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION MODEL POLICY I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for eyewitness identification procedures using photographic lineups, live lineups and showups. II.
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
MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY. EFFECTIVE DATE: 1 January 1999 PAGE 1 OF 12
MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY AND PROCEDURE # 77 SUBJECT: Investigative Division EFFECTIVE DATE: 1 January 1999 PAGE 1 OF 12 REVIEW DATE: 30 November 2017 APPROVED:
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
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:
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
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
CHAPTER 17 - ARREST POLICIES Alternatives to Arrest and Incarceration Criminal Process Immigration Violations
CHAPTER 17 - ARREST POLICIES 17.1 - Alternatives to Arrest and Incarceration 17.2 - Criminal Process 17.3 - Immigration Violations GARDEN GROVE POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER 17.1 Effective Date: January
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,
LAST UPDATE: POLICY SOURCE: Chief of Police TOTAL PAGES: 7
ONALASKA POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY ISSUE DATE: 10-28-2005 TITLE: Eyewitness Identification LAST UPDATE: 10-28-05 SECTION: Operations TEXT NAME: Eyewitness POLICY SOURCE: Chief of Police TOTAL PAGES: 7 AUTHOR:
Public Copy CASPER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. Investigative Procedure: Search & Seizure. 4 - Operations 03C -
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
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
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
SUSPECT IDENTIFICATION
PROCEDURE NUMBER: 402 EFFECTIVE DATE: November 17, 1992 SUBJECT: SUSPECT IDENTIFICATION 402.1 PURPOSE: To establish a uniform procedure for the conduct of stand-up line-ups, photo array line-ups, and other
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
NH DIVISION OF LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT AND LICENSING
NH DIVISION OF LIQUOR ENFORCEMENT AND LICENSING ADMINISTRATION & OPERATIONS MANUAL CHAPTER: O-130 SUBJECT: Arrest Procedures REVISED: February 10, 2010 EFFECTIVE DATE: August 14, 2009 DISTRIBUTION: Sworn
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
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
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:
Bowie State University Police Department General Order
Bowie State University Police Department General Order Subject: Laws and Rules of Arrest Number: 2 Effective Date: July 2003 Rescinds: N/A Approved: Acting Director Roderick C. Pullen This article contains
Contents. Legal Guide for Police Constitutional Issues 10 th Edition Jeffery T. Walker and Craig Hemmens. Preface. Chapter 1.
Legal Guide for Police Constitutional Issues 10 th Edition Jeffery T. Walker and Craig Hemmens Contents Preface Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Criminal Procedure 1.2 Sources of Criminal Procedure Law 1.3 Judicial
ROLE AND AUTHORITY WRITTEN DIRECTIVE: 1.10 EFFECTIVE DATE: REVISION DATE: SUPERSEDES EDITION DATED:
ROLE AND AUTHORITY WRITTEN DIRECTIVE: 1.10 EFFECTIVE DATE: 01-31-1996 REVISION DATE: 07-20-2017 SUPERSEDES EDITION DATED: 08-15-2016 Contents: I. Purpose II. Policy III. Establishing Goals and Objectives
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...
INVESTIGATIONS OF STUDENTS AT PUBLIC SCHOOLS
INVESTIGATIONS OF STUDENTS AT PUBLIC SCHOOLS INDEX CODE: 1705 EFFECTIVE DATE: 09-06-17 Contents: I. School Resource Officers II. Arrests/Questioning/Removal of Students on School Premises During School
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
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,
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
TEXARKANA, TEXAS POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDERS MANUAL. Amended Date June 1, 2017
Effective Date February 1, 2008 Reference Amended Date June 1, 2017 Distribution All Personnel City Manager City Attorney TPCA Best Practices Recognition Program Reference Review Date January 1, 2018 Pages
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
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
TEXARKANA, TEXAS POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDERS MANUAL. Amended Date November 1, 2015
Effective Date February 1, 2008 Reference Amended Date November 1, 2015 Distribution All Personnel City Manager City Attorney TPCA Best Practices Recognition Program Reference Review Date January 1, 2017
Policy 5.11 ARREST PROCEDURES
Cobb County Police Department Policy 5.11 ARREST PROCEDURES Effective Date: November 1, 2017 Issued By: Chief M.J. Register Rescinds: Policy 5.11 (February 1, 2015) Page 1 of 9 The words he, his, him,
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:
LEGAL PROCESS WRITTEN DIRECTIVE: 14.3 EFFECTIVE DATE: REVISION DATE:
LEGAL PROCESS WRITTEN DIRECTIVE: 14.3 EFFECTIVE DATE: 09-15-1995 REVISION DATE: 04-11-2016 Contents I. Purpose II. Policy III. Definitions IV. Documentation V. Service/Execution of Criminal Documents VI.
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
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
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
POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND RULES
FAYETTEVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND RULES Subject: 1.2.1 Limits of Authority Effective Date: November 15, 2016 Reference: 41.2.7, 71.1.1, AR 12-9-102 Version:
COVINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE
COVINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE Subject: LINE-UPS AND SHOW-UPS Date of Issue: 02-10-2011 Number of Pages: 6 Policy No. I075 Distribution: ALL Review Date: Revision Date: I. Purpose
Virginia Commonwealth University Police Department
Virginia Commonwealth University Police Department SECTION NUMBER CHIEF OF POLICE EFFECTIVE REVIEW DATE 6 12 11/13/2013 12/1/2016 SUBJECT PROCEDURE FOR CONSULAR NOTIFICATION OF FOREIGN OFFICIALS GENERAL
Page U.S. 129 S.Ct L. Ed. 2d 694. v. LEMON MONTREA JOHNSON. No Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 9, 2008.
Page 1 555 U.S. 129 S.Ct. 781 172 L. Ed. 2d 694 ARIZONA, PETITIONER v. LEMON MONTREA JOHNSON No. 07-1122. Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 9, 2008. Decided January 26, 2009. In Terry v.
Eyewitness refers to an individual who personally witnessed the crime under investigation or observed the suspect in the area of the crime scene.
UW Madison Police Department Policy: 42.2 SUBJECT: INVESTIGATIONS-OPERATIONS EFFECTIVE DATE: 06/01/10 REVISED DATE: 02/15/17; 11/16/17; 03/23/18 REVIEWED DATE: 08/15/15 STANDARD: CALEA 42.2.1 42.2.12 IACLEA
LAWS OF ARREST. Unit th Amendment
LAWS OF ARREST Unit 2-3 Every time an arrest is made, MUST exist. When a felony has been committed, or there is reasonable ground to believe that a felony has been committed, without a warrant may arrest
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:
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
New York State Photo Identification Guidelines
1. Introduction There are various ways to conduct a fair and reliable identification procedure. The guidelines below outline how a neutral, fair and reliable identification procedure can be conducted by
Subject CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CITATION PROCEDURES. DRAFT 7 April By Order of the Police Commissioner
Policy 808 Subject CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CITATION PROCEDURES Date Published Page DRAFT 7 April 2018 1 of 10 By Order of the Police Commissioner POLICY It is the policy of the Baltimore Police Department (BPD)
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,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 555 U. S. (2009) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. DRAFT 20 March By Order of the Police Commissioner
Policy 711 Subject Date Published DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Page DRAFT 20 March 2018 1 of 13 By Order of the Police Commissioner POLICY As reflected in Maryland law, violent crime particularly impacts those with
Boston Police Department Rules and Procedures Rule 400C January 8, 2007
CONSTABLES This rule is issued to establish the Department s policies for Constables. The provisions of this rule are effective immediately, superseding all previously issued rules, procedures, orders
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 113,576 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellant, TRAE D. REED, Appellee.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 113,576 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellant, v. TRAE D. REED, Appellee. MEMORANDUM OPINION Affirmed. Appeal from Reno District Court;
R.C Page 1. (1) Administrator means the person conducting a photo lineup or live lineup.
R.C. 2933.83 Page 1 Baldwin's Ohio Revised Code Annotated Currentness Title XXIX. Crimes--Procedure (Refs & Annos) Chapter 2933. Peace Warrants; Search Warrants (Refs & Annos) Evidentiary Provisions 2933.83
Signature: Signed by GNT Date Signed: 12/10/13
Atlanta Police Department Policy Manual Standard Operating Procedure Effective Date: December 30, 2013 Polygraph and Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Applicable To: All sworn employees Approval Authority:
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
Anaheim Police Department Anaheim PD Policy Manual
Policy 319 Anaheim Police Department 319.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this policy is to provide the guidelines necessary to deter, prevent and reduce domestic violence through vigorous enforcement
BILL AS INTRODUCED AND PASSED BY SENATE AND HOUSE S Page 1 of 11. Subject: Crimes; innocence protection; eyewitness identification
2014 Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 S.184 Introduced by Senators Sears, Ashe, and Benning Referred to Committee on Judiciary Date: January 7, 2014 Subject: Crimes; innocence
BALTIMORE CITY SCHOOLS Baltimore School Police Force DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE This Directive contains the following numbered sections: I. Directive II. Purpose III. Policy IV. Definitions V. General Responsibilities VI. Required Action VII. Reporting VIII. Protective
In this interlocutory appeal, the supreme court considers whether the district court
Opinions of the Colorado Supreme Court are available to the public and can be accessed through the Court s homepage at http://www.courts.state.co.us. Opinions are also posted on the Colorado Bar Association
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATIONS:
State Bar of Michigan Eyewitness Identification Task Force LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATIONS: A Policy Writing Guide 2012 Contents OVERVIEW...3 A Note on Terminology...3 PURPOSE...4 Goals...4
Trappe Police Department
Trappe Police Department Title: Civil Marijuana Violations Directive #: 17.6 Issued: 10.1.2016 Revised: 10.1.2016 Approved by: George N. Ball, Jr. Chief of Police A. Purpose To outline the procedures for
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
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
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
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,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 544 U. S. (2005) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
KNOWLES v. IOWA. certiorari to the supreme court of iowa
OCTOBER TERM, 1998 113 Syllabus KNOWLES v. IOWA certiorari to the supreme court of iowa No. 97 7597. Argued November 3, 1998 Decided December 8, 1998 An Iowa policeman stopped petitioner Knowles for speeding
2018 PA Super 183 : : : : : : : : :
2018 PA Super 183 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellant v. TAREEK ALQUAN HEMINGWAY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 684 WDA 2017 Appeal from the Order March 31, 2017 In the Court of Common Pleas