New version page

CrimPro-Law of Arrest Checklist

Upgrade to remove ads

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 6 pages.

Save
View Full Document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 6 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Upgrade to remove ads
Unformatted text preview:

Law of Arrest Checklist Step 1: Is there Probable Cause to Arrest the Suspect? Step 2: Do you need a Warrant?o Where is the Arrest going to take place? IN PUBLIC - If Felony, no Warrant needed.- If Misdemeanor…o Committed in presence of officerno warranto Not in presence of officer  warrant. IN SUSPECT’S HOME - Arrest warrant necessary, unless:o Exigent circumstanceso Valid consent- Note: threshold of home is considered “in public” for purposes of arrest [Santana] IN ANOTHER’S HOME - Search warrant needed (and maybe arrest warrant), unless:o Exigent circumstanceso Valid consent Step 3: Is Warrant Validly Executed?o Reasonable basis to believe suspect is at home at time of executiono Knock & Announce  Step 4: Is Deadly Force Used? [Tennessee v. Garner]o Unreasonable, unless police have reasonable belief that felon: is armed and dangerous presents a significant risk to society Step 5: If arrest is unlawful, did it lead to the acquisition of evidence to be used against suspect?o YES, evidence may be excluded.o NO, unlawful arrest has no impact on criminal prosecution.Law of Arrest Checklist Expanded Step 1: Is there Probable Cause to Arrest the Suspect?Type of Detention Level of Suspicion Police RightRequest for Intrusion Anytime, except on “whim or caprice”Suspect’s right not to respond or to run away does not give rise to PC or reasonable suspicion.Common Law Right to Inquire Founded suspicion that criminal activity is afootAsk questions briefly—if individual gives explanations, police must release her.Stop (and Frisk) Reasonable suspicion that individual has committed or is about to commit a crime.If reasonable belief that individual is harmed, frisk may be conductedArrest Probable cause. Conduct warrantless search incident to arrest.o Analysis: subjective intentions play no role for ordinary probable cause Fourth Amendment analysis. Arkansas v. Sullivan— ∆’s tinted windows were too tinted for state of Arkansas—an arrestable offense. On pretext for inquiring about overly-tinted windows, police search driver’s person and find drugs. Police admitted that their subjective impulse was to check car for drugs. Held: Even when police admit on recordthat their mindset was in a dif. direction than cause for traffic stop, it doesn’t matter. All that matters is objectively if police had cause to pull car over. o Factors in Determining Suspicion—none alone is sufficient to establish probable cause.  Furtive/shady gestures Flight Failure to identify oneself to police- Failure to ID plus reasonable suspicion that the person has committed or is committing an offense gives rise to PC to arrest [Hiibel v. Nevada] Reputation- Of Areao Flight in a high-crime area does give reasonable suspicion as ground to stopping [Illinois v. Wardlow]o Mere standing in high crime area is insufficient for reas. suspicion. - Of Persono Reputation of person can play role in establishing PC for arrest [Hensley] Sensory Perceptions- Smell - Sight- Use of aids permittedo Can use tracking beeper on public streets [US v. Knotts; US v. Karo]o Cannot use sense-enhancing device not in general public use to explore details of the home that previously would have been unknowable without physical intrusion [Kyllo v. US]. Officer Expertise- Under the totality of the circumstances test, facts are not to be considered in isolation, but taken collectively, giving due weight to factual inferences drawn by law enforcement officers [US v. Arvizu] Valid APB from another jurisdiction- A valid APB can give rise to PC [US v. Hensley]o If PC, was there a search? Rule: if the offense is an arrestable infraction, a warrantless arrest and incident search is allowed regardless of how minor the violation is [Atwater v. City of Lago Vista]o If no PC, was there an arrest? Rule: an arrest occurs when suspect — - is physically collared; or - responds affirmatively to police commands (ex: stopping when told to stop). Mere police presence is not an arrest or a stop [California v. Hodari D.]- If you are free to ignore their commands, you have not been stoppedo Florida v. Bostick—police boarded bus and started questioning people. Held that the onlyreason they couldn’t leave was because bus was moving. People were technically free to ignore police orders and therefore were not stopped. Was detention valid based on lower level of suspicion?- Fitting drug courier profile gives reasonable suspicion to stop [US v. Sokolow]- Dog sniff is not a search—but detaining suspect unreasonably while luggage is sniffed is an arrest [US v. Place] If Defendant is validly stopped—was detention long enough to qualify as arrest?- Court looks at totality of circumstances to determine whether length of detention based on reasonable suspicion is reasonable o Sharpe v. US— Police and DEA were monitoring drug smuggling road, and one of the DEA and police pull over 2-car caravan—which meets courier profile. They pulled them over a mile apart, but lost radio contact with each other. All the communication to regain radio contact took longer than 20 minutes. Held: reasonable detention—not an arrest.o But… Florida v. Royer—∆ fit drug courier profile—taken to small room at airport for 20 minutes until luggage could be found and checked. Held: Arrest—PC was necessary andpolice didn’t have it: evidence excluded.o Taken to police station? Station-House Detention Rule: probable cause needed to compel a person against their will to come to the station house for interrogation or fingerprinting [Hayes v. Florida].- Dunaway v. New York—police were interviewing guy in jail, who said that ∆ was involved in bankrobberies. Police retrieved ∆ who was on parole and took him to station for questioning. Policeadmitted they didn’t initially believe guy in jail—only had reasonable suspicion not probable cause. Held: inadmissible—PC required. - Kaupp v. Texas—6 police officers investigating murder went to home of 17-year old boy at 3am and took boy to station, where he made incriminating statements. Police concededly didn’t have probable cause and didn’t have arrest warrant. Court rejected this conclusion, saying there was no reason to think that boy’s submission of “OK” was lawful submission to police authority. Failure to struggle with a cohort of deputy sheriffs is not a waiver of your 4th


Download CrimPro-Law of Arrest Checklist
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view CrimPro-Law of Arrest Checklist and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view CrimPro-Law of Arrest Checklist 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?