CONTENTS. Acknowledgments The Constitution of the United States CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1

Similar documents
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE I

COURSE SYLLABUS. Tuesday & Thursday, 12:50-2:20 p.m supplement to your casebook posted on TWEN site as a pdf file under Course Materials

CONSTITUTIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE I Professor Nancy S. Forster Fall 2017 Semester

CRJ 551 Legal Issues in Criminal Justice Administration II. Case Brief Guidelines and Rubric

Contents PART ONE THE CRIMINAL PROCESS. Chapter 1 Introduction to the Criminal Justice System

Criminal Justice A Brief Introduction

Copyright 2015 Carolina Academic Press, LLC. All rights reserved. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: CASES, MATERIALS, AND QUESTIONS Fourth Edition

RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY PROGRAM IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SUMMER :202:205:B6 M/W 6:00-10:00 TIL 103B

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS IN A NUTSHELL. Fifth Edition JEROLD H. ISRAEL

Criminal Justice: A Brief Introduction Twelfth Edition

RUTGERS UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Criminal Procedure tomkovicz white 8e last pages.indb 1 12/5/16 11:13 AM

DRAFT [8-4-15] TUFTS UNIVERSITY EXPERIMENTAL COLLEGE FALL 2015

RUTGERS UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SPRING :202:205:01 T/Th 5-6:20 LCB 109

Privacy and the Fourth Amendment: Basics of Criminal Procedural Analysis for Government Searches and Seizures

The Law of Interrogation in North Carolina

Contents PART ONE THE CRIMINAL PROCESS. Chapter 1 Introduction to the Criminal Justice System

~ Constitutional Criminal Procedure Outline ~ Fall 2008 ~ Prof. Bradley

Contents. Legal Guide for Police Constitutional Issues 10 th Edition Jeffery T. Walker and Craig Hemmens. Preface. Chapter 1.

FEDERAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: THE BASICS. Glen A. Sproviero, Esq. Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP New York, New York

Criminal Justice in America CJ Chapter 7 James J. Drylie, Ph.D.

A digest of twenty one (21) significant US Supreme Court decisions interpreting Miranda

23 Motions To Suppress Tangible Evidence

U.S. SUPREME COURT TERM: CASES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE

TUFTS UNIVERSITY. U R B A N & E N V I R O M E N T A L POLICY AND P L A N N I N G L e g a l F r a m e w o r k s of S o c i a l P o l i c y UEP-0215

State Trial Courts with Incidental Appellate Jurisdiction, 2010

UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON LAW CENTER TEXAS CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PROFESSOR SECREST. Course Description and Syllabus

TUFTS UNIVERSITY. U R B A N & E N V I R O M E N T A L POLICY AND P L A N N I N G L e g a l F r a m e w o r k s of S o c i a l P o l i c y

Miranda Rights. Interrogations and Confessions

TUFTS UNIVERSITY. U R B A N & E N V I R O M E N T A L POLICY AND P L A N N I N G L e g a l F r a m e w o r k s of S o c i a l P o l i c y UEP-0215

PART I INTRODUCTORY MATTERS AND TERMINOLOGY 1

Criminal Procedure Outline

SEARCHES, SEIZURES AND STATEMENTS th th th. The Busy Lawyer s Handbook on the 4, 5 & 6 Amendments

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...

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH. Article III. The Role of the Federal Court

Sixth Amendment. Fair Trial

THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND

Case 3:07-cr KES Document 15 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA CENTRAL DIVISION

U.S. SUPREME COURT TERM: CASES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE Through May 24, 2004

CHAPTER 34. A. Introduction

SEARCH AND SEIZURE: CAN THEY DO THAT?

National State Law Survey: Statute of Limitations 1

Criminal Procedure Update: Drones, Dogs and Delay TOPICS. Recent Supreme Court Cases. Professor Laurie L. Levenson Loyola Law School (2016)

Criminal Justice 100

Matthew Miller, Bureau of Legislative Research

In the Supreme Court of the United States

PERMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING IN THE UNITED STATES. Member Electronic Vote/ . Alabama No No Yes No. Alaska No No No No

CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: AN UPDATE

Criminal Procedure Outline

e. City of Boerne v. Flores (1997) i. RFRA Unconstitutional f. Court Reversal on Use of Peyote in 2006 B. Freedom of Speech and Press 1.

The Incorporation Doctrine Extending the Bill of Rights to the States

Detailed Contents SECTION I: THE PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE OF AMERICAN COURTS

Rights of the Accused

ACCESS TO STATE GOVERNMENT 1. Web Pages for State Laws, State Rules and State Departments of Health

TELEPHONE; STATISTICAL INFORMATION; PRISONS AND PRISONERS; LITIGATION; CORRECTIONS; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION ISSUES

Know Your Rights ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION. Protecting Rights and Defending Freedom on the Electronic Frontier eff.org

2016 Voter Registration Deadlines by State

Amendments to the Constitution

HOW TO WRITE ESSAYS FOR CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW SCHOOL AND BAR EXAMS. WHAT to Say and HOW to Say It! Tim Tyler Ph.D.

ARIZONA PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING BOARD HOUR BASIC CURRICULUM MODEL LESSON PLAN LESSON TITLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2.

Campaign Finance E-Filing Systems by State WHAT IS REQUIRED? WHO MUST E-FILE? Candidates (Annually, Monthly, Weekly, Daily).

REVISITING THE APPLICATION OF THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE TO THE GOOD FAITH EXCEPTIONS IN LIGHT OF HUDSON V. MICHIGAN

THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE I & II

U.S. Sentencing Commission Preliminary Crack Retroactivity Data Report Fair Sentencing Act

Appendix: Legal Boundaries Between the Juvenile and Criminal. Justice Systems in the United States. Patrick Griffin

Judicial Ethics Advisory Committees by State Links at

Department of Justice

Class Actions and the Refund of Unconstitutional Taxes. Revenue Laws Study Committee Trina Griffin, Research Division April 2, 2008

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

National Latino Peace Officers Association

Revisiting the Application of the Exclusionary Rule to the Good Faith Exceptions in Light of Hudson v. Michigan

Offender Population Forecasts. House Appropriations Public Safety Subcommittee January 19, 2012

United States Supreme Court Term: Cases Affecting Criminal Law and Procedure

chapter 3 Name: Class: Date: Multiple Choice Identify the letter of the choice that best completes the statement or answers the question.

U.S. Sentencing Commission 2014 Drug Guidelines Amendment Retroactivity Data Report

United States Constitutional Law: Theory, Practice, and Interpretation

Criminal Law and Practice

The Victim Rights Law Center thanks Catherine Cambridge for her research assistance.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE IN PRACTICE, THIRD EDITION

DECEPTION Moran v. Burbine*

2008 Changes to the Constitution of International Union UNITED STEELWORKERS

Search Warrant Exceptions. Coach Presnell

Case 3:15-md CRB Document 4700 Filed 01/29/18 Page 1 of 5

The remaining legislative bodies have guides that help determine bill assignments. Table shows the criteria used to refer bills.

MEMORANDUM JUDGES SERVING AS ARBITRATORS AND MEDIATORS

NOTICE TO MEMBERS No January 2, 2018

THE PROCESS TO RENEW A JUDGMENT SHOULD BEGIN 6-8 MONTHS PRIOR TO THE DEADLINE

The Irrelevancy of the Fourth Amendment in the Roberts Court

2010 State Animal Protection Laws Rankings

Total Test Questions: 100 Levels: Units of Credit: 0.50

The Electoral College And

PRE-TRIAL PROCESSES INITIAL APPEARANCE. What you should know before you get started

MOTION OF AMICUS CURIAE FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER

Supreme Court of the United States

AFFIRMATION. Sample. 1. I am a member of the law firm,, attorneys for the accused herein. I make this affirmation in support of the within motion.

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY CANTON, NEW YORK

Say What?! A Review of Recent U.S. Supreme Court 5 th Amendment Self-incrimination Case Law

THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE

ACTION: Notice announcing addresses for summons and complaints. SUMMARY: Our Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is responsible for processing

ABOUT THE LSD The HNBA-LSD is a national organization of law students governed by its members. The mission of the HNBA-LSD is to increase the number

Transcription:

CONTENTS Preface Acknowledgments The Constitution of the United States xxi xxiii xxv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1 A. The Participants in the Criminal Justice System 1 1. Defendants 2 2. Defense Counsel 2 3. Prosecutors 2 4. Victims 3 5. Police and Other Law Enforcement Officers 3 6. Magistrates and Judges 4 7. Jurors 4 8. Corrections Officials 4 9. Public 5 10. Media 5 B. Stages of the Criminal Justice Process 5 1. Step 1: Pre-Arrest Investigation 6 2. Step 2: Arrest 6 3. Step 3: Filing the Complaint 7 4. Step 4: Gerstein Review 7 5. Step 5: First Appearance/Arraignment on Complaint 7 6. Step 6: Grand Jury or Preliminary Hearing 8 7. Step 7: Arraignment on Indictment or Information 9 8. Step 8: Discovery 9 9. Step 9: Pretrial Motions 9 10. Step 10: Plea Bargaining and Guilty Pleas 9 11. Step 11: Trial 10 12. Step 12: Sentencing 11 13. Step 13: Appeals and Habeas Corpus 11 C. The Purpose of Procedural Rules 12 Powell v. Alabama 13 Patterson v. Former Chicago Police Lt. Jon Burge 16 D. Key Provisions of the Bill of Rights 19 E. The Application of the Bill of Rights to the States 20 1. The Provisions of the Bill of Rights and the Idea of Incorporation 20 2. The Debate over Incorporation 22 xi

xii 3. The Current Law as to What s Incorporated 24 Duncan v. Louisiana 24 4. The Content of Incorporated Rights 27 F. Retroactivity 29 CHAPTER 2 SEARCHES AND SEIZURES 31 A. Introduction 31 B. What Is a Search? 32 Katz v. United States 32 United States v. Jones 38 1. Open Fields 49 Oliver v. United States 49 United States v. Dunn 55 2. Aerial Searches 59 California v. Ciraolo 59 Florida v. Riley 63 3. Thermal Imaging of Homes 70 Kyllo v. United States 70 4. Searches of Trash 77 California v. Greenwood 77 5. Observation and Monitoring of Public Behavior 81 United States v. Knotts 81 Smith v. Maryland 85 6. Use of Dogs to Sniff for Contraband 89 Illinois v. Caballes 91 Rodriguez v. United States 94 Florida v. Jardines 99 Florida v. Harris 104 C. The Requirement for Probable Cause 109 1. What Is Sufficient Belief to Meet the Standard for Probable Cause? 109 Illinois v. Gates 110 Maryland v. Pringle 118 2. Is It an Objective or a Subjective Standard? 120 Whren v. United States 121 3. What if the Police Make a Mistake as to the Law? 125 Heien v. North Carolina 125 D. The Warrant Requirement 130 1. What Information Must Be Included in the Application for a Warrant? 131 2. What Form Must the Warrant Take? 132 Andresen v. Maryland 132 Groh v. Ramirez 136 3. What Are the Requirements in Executing Warrants? 141 a. How May Police Treat Those Who Are Present When a Warrant Is Being Executed? 142

xiii Muehler v. Mena 143 b. Do Police Have to Knock and Announce Before Searching a Dwelling? 147 Wilson v. Arkansas 147 Richards v. Wisconsin 150 c. What If There Are Unforeseen Circumstances or Mistakes While Executing a Warrant? 153 Maryland v. Garrison 154 Los Angeles County, California v. Rettele 157 E. Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement 160 1. Exigent Circumstances 161 a. Hot Pursuit 161 Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden 161 Payton v. New York 163 b. Safety 166 Brigham City, Utah v. Stuart 166 c. Preventing Destruction of Evidence 168 Kentucky v. King 168 d. Limits on Exigent Circumstances 175 Missouri v. McNeely 176 Birchfield v. North Dakota 185 2. Plain View 195 Coolidge v. New Hampshire 195 Minnesota v. Dickerson 198 3. The Automobile Exception 200 a. The Exception and Its Rationale 201 California v. Carney 201 b. Searches of Containers in Automobiles 205 California v. Acevedo 205 c. Searching Automobiles Incident to Arrest 210 4. Searches Incident to Arrest 210 Chimel v. California 210 Knowles v. Iowa 214 Riley v. California 216 Arizona v. Gant 226 5. Inventory Searches 236 South Dakota v. Opperman 236 Illinois v. Lafayette 240 6. Protective Sweeps 242 Maryland v. Buie 243 7. Consent 247 Schneckloth v. Bustamonte 247 Georgia v. Randolph 254 Fernandez v. California 258 8. Searches When There Are Special Needs 265 a. Administrative Searches 266 Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco 266 New York v. Burger 271

xiv City of Los Angeles v. Patel 275 b. Border Crossing 283 United States v. Flores-Montano 283 United States v. Ramsey 286 United States v. Montoya-Hernandez 288 c. Checkpoints 294 Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz 294 City of Indianapolis v. Edmond 297 d. Schools 302 Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding 302 e. The Government Employment Context 311 City of Ontario v. Quon 311 f. Drug Testing 318 Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton 319 Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls 327 Ferguson v. City of Charleston 335 g. Searches in Jails and Prisons 340 Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington 340 h. DNA Testing of Those Arrested 348 Maryland v. King 349 9. Searches of Those on Probation and Parole 361 United States v. Knights 361 Samson v. California 364 F. Seizures and Arrests 367 1. Is a Warrant Needed for Arrests? 367 United States v. Watson 368 2. When Is a Person Seized? 373 United States v. Mendenhall 373 California v. Hodari D. 380 3. For What Crimes May a Person Be Arrested? 384 Atwater v. City of Lago Vista 384 G. Stop and Frisk 393 1. The Authority for Police to Stop and Frisk 394 Terry v. Ohio 394 2. The Distinction Between Stops and Arrests 404 3. What May Police Do When They Stop an Individual? 405 Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada 405 4. What Is Sufficient for Reasonable Suspicion? 409 a. Reasonable Suspicion: General Principles 409 United States v. Arvizu 409 b. Reasonable Suspicion Based on Informants Tips 413 Alabama v. White 413 Florida v. J.L. 416 Navarette v. California 419

xv c. Reasonable Suspicion Based on a Person s Trying to Avoid a Police Officer 426 Illinois v. Wardlow 426 d. Reasonable Suspicion Based on Profiles 431 United States v. Sokolow 432 H. Electronic Surveillance 436 1. Is Electronic Eavesdropping a Search? 437 2. Statutory Requirements 439 3. Warrantless Eavesdropping 442 United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan 442 CHAPTER 3 THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE 451 A. Is the Exclusionary Rule a Desirable Remedy for Unconstitutional Police Behavior? 451 Hudson v. Michigan 452 B. The Origins of the Exclusionary Rule 456 Weeks v. United States 457 Mapp v. Ohio 459 C. When Does the Exclusionary Rule Apply? 465 Herring v. United States 466 Davis v. United States 474 D. Who Can Object to the Introduction of Evidence and Raise the Exclusionary Rule? 480 Rakas v. Illinois 480 Minnesota v. Carter 487 Brendlin v. California 491 E. Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule 495 1. Independent Source 495 Murray v. United States 496 2. Inevitable Discovery 501 Nix v. Williams 501 3. Inadequate Causal Connection Attenuation of the Taint 508 Brown v. Illinois 509 Utah v. Strieff 515 4. The Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule 524 United States v. Leon 525 5. The Exception for Violations of the Requirement for Knocking and Announcing 542 F. Suppression Hearings 543

xvi CHAPTER 4 POLICE INTERROGATION AND THE PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION 547 A. Due Process and the Requirement for Voluntariness 548 1. The Requirement for Voluntariness 548 Brown v. Mississippi 549 2. Determining Whether a Confession Is Voluntary 551 a. The Length of the Interrogation and Whether the Defendant Was Deprived of Basic Bodily Needs 551 b. The Use of Force and Threats of Force 551 Arizona v. Fulminante 552 c. Psychological Pressure Tactics 555 Spano v. New York 555 d. Deception 559 e. The Age, Level of Education, and Mental Condition of a Suspect 559 Colorado v. Connelly 560 3. Is the Voluntariness Test Desirable? 565 4. Coercive Questioning, Torture, and the War on Terrorism 566 B. Fifth Amendment Limits on In-Custodial Interrogation: Miranda v. Arizona 566 1. Miranda v. Arizona and Its Affirmation by the Supreme Court 566 Miranda v. Arizona 567 Dickerson v. United States 581 2. Is Miranda Desirable? 586 3. What Are the Requirements for Miranda to Apply? 588 a. When Is a Person in Custody? 588 Oregon v. Mathiason 589 J.D.B. v. North Carolina 592 Berkemer v. McCarty 598 b. What Is an Interrogation? 602 Rhode Island v. Innis 602 Illinois v. Perkins 609 c. What Is Required of the Police? 613 California v. Prysock 613 Duckworth v. Eagan 616 4. What Are the Consequences of a Violation of Miranda? 620 Oregon v. Elstad 622 Missouri v. Seibert 628 United States v. Patane 634 5. Waiver of Miranda Rights 638 a. What Is Sufficient to Constitute a Waiver? 638 North Carolina v. Butler 639 Berghuis v. Thompkins 641 Salinas v. Texas 650 b. How Is a Waiver After the Assertion of Rights Treated? 655 Michigan v. Mosley 656

xvii Edwards v. Arizona 659 Minnick v. Mississippi 662 Maryland v. Shatzer 667 Davis v. United States 674 6. What Are the Exceptions to Miranda? 679 a. Impeachment 679 Harris v. New York 679 b. Emergencies 682 New York v. Quarles 682 c. Booking Exception 689 C. The Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel and Police Interrogations 690 1. The Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel During Interrogations 691 Massiah v. United States 691 Brewer v. Williams 696 2. The Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel Is Offense Specific 702 Texas v. Cobb 703 3. Waivers 707 Montejo v. Louisiana 708 4. What Is Impermissible Police Eliciting of Statements? 717 United States v. Henry 718 Kuhlmann v. Wilson 722 D. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination in Other Contexts 726 1. What Are the Requirements for the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination to Apply? 726 a. Only Individuals May Invoke the Privilege 727 b. The Privilege Applies Only to That Which Is Testimonial 727 Schmerber v. California 727 c. There Must Be Compulsion 731 d. There Must Be the Possibility of Incrimination 732 2. When May the Government Require the Production of Documents and Other Things? 734 Fisher v. United States 735 3. May the Government Require Testimony If It Provides Immunity? 740 Kastigar v. United States 741 United States v. Hubbell 745 CHAPTER 5 IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES 751 A. The Right to Counsel 752 1. The Right to Counsel in Lineups 752 United States v. Wade 752

xviii 2. Limits on the Right to Counsel in Identification Procedures 763 Kirby v. Illinois 763 United States v. Ash 768 B. Due Process Protection for Identification Procedures 775 1. Unnecessarily Suggestive Identification Procedures by Police Violate Due Process 775 Foster v. California 776 2. Limits on the Ability of Courts to Find That Identification Procedures Violate Due Process 779 Simmons v. United States 779 Neil v. Biggers 782 Manson v. Brathwaite 786 3. Requirement That Police Be Involved in Creating the Suggestive Identification Procedure 793 Perry v. New Hampshire 793 CHAPTER 6 TRIAL 801 A. Trial by Jury 801 1. Role of the Jury 801 Duncan v. Louisiana 802 2. When Is There a Right to a Jury Trial? 806 3. Composition of the Jury 807 a. Number of Jurors 807 Williams v. Florida 807 Ballew v. Georgia 811 b. Unanimity 814 Apodaca v. Oregon 815 B. Jury Composition and Selection 819 1. Selecting the Jury Venire 819 Taylor v. Louisiana 819 2. Selecting the Petit Jury 824 Batson v. Kentucky 825 3. Applying Batson 836 a. Standing to Raise Batson Challenges 836 b. Batson Challenges in Civil Cases 837 c. Discriminatory Use of Peremptory Challenges by the Defense 837 d. Batson Challenges to Other Types of Discrimination 839 e. The Mechanics of Bringing Batson Challenges 841 Snyder v. Louisiana 842 Rivera v. Illinois 846

xix C. Pretrial Publicity and the Right to a Fair Trial 849 1. When Does Pretrial Publicity Interfere with a Defendant s Right to a Fair Trial? 849 Irvin v. Dowd 849 Skilling v. United States 853 2. Remedies for Prejudicial Pretrial Publicity 859 a. Closure of Courtrooms 859 b. Other Remedies 861 Sheppard v. Maxwell 862 c. Ethical Limitations on Lawyers Extrajudicial Comments 866 Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada 867 United States v. Cutler 869 d. Prior Restraints 872 Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart 872 3. Cameras in the Courtroom 878 Chandler v. Florida 878 D. Trial Rights: Due Process, Right of Confrontation, and Privilege Against Self-Incrimination 883 1. Right of Confrontation 884 a. Right to Be Present at Trial 884 Illinois v. Allen 884 Deck v. Missouri 886 b. Right to Confront Witnesses 888 Maryland v. Craig 889 Crawford v. Washington 892 Michigan v. Bryant 896 Ohio v. Clark 901 2. Privilege Against Self-Incrimination and Improper Closing Arguments 908 Griffin v. California 908 Darden v. Wainwright 911 E. Defendant s Right to Present a Defense 913 Chambers v. Mississippi 914 Holmes v. South Carolina 917 F. Role of the Jury and Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt 920 In re Winship 920 Table of Cases 925 Index 931