POSC 130g 1st Edition Lecture 6Current LecturePolice Use of Force1) Beating of Rodney Kinga. Multiple fractures of skullb. Led to Amnesty International Investigation of LAPD- first face= finding mission in USA2) Abner Louima case (New York, 1997) a. Officers convicted; their convictions overturnedb. not retried; 1 new trialc. Louima won civil judgment for $8.7 million3) No double jeopardy issue with criminal and civil litigation4) Police practices that raise questions: a. tasers, pepper spray, chokeholds, hogtyingOriginally the Bill of Rights was only thought to limit action of the bill of rights, not the state. Yet, the 14th Amendment relates to state action as well, and provides that no state may “depriveany person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Since the law enforcement officials of the state count as state actions, state criminal procedures are governed by the US constitution The rights that are in the Bill of Rights apply to the state, implicit in the concept of libertyAnother phrase: the 14th Amendment only requires guarantees that are fundamental to the American scheme of justice. The total incorporation approach argues that all the rights of the Bill of Rights are incorporated in the 14th amendment and therefore applicable to the state. States are required to recognize every procedural right that the federal government must protect. selective incorporation approach holds that no all rights enumerated are applicable, but any aspect of right is so necessary to fundamental fairness that it applies to the state, then all aspects of that right must apply. Self incrimination: Is it so important that it should apply to the state? The court would need to look at it. Approach the question in different ways.Incorporation applies to both the rights apply to the states and the interpretations apply to the states- is it including the exclusionary rule? InterrogationC. Police do not inform suspectMoran v. Burbine (1986) Interrelationship of 5th and 6th amendmentChavez v. Martinez (2003) Hospital interrogationNo. 5th amendment violationIn pain in the hospital, while the police are questioning himIs there a violation of the 5th amendment?The court didn’t hold it because he wasn’t processed. The right of incrimination: Was the testimony used in any legal action? Does it matter if they were used in testimony against him?What if the police don’t hold them accountable? Does it give license to the police to do similar things in the future?Warrants1. Invalid warrantsUS v. Leon (1984) “good faith exception” Supreme court has given more leeway to the police by creating exceptionsStudies of the Miranda decision: Yale believed that the Miranda didn’t limit police as much as they thoughtJuveniles1. In re Gault (1967) a. making obscene phone callsb. Due process for juvinelles, logic of court's reasoning hinged on fundamental fairness, due process needs to be part of justice system2. Fare v. Michael C. (1979) a. No 5th amendment violationb. California Supreme Court said the 16th year old kid confession had to be excludedbecause he didn’t have an attorney with him. He asked to see probation officer but was denied. This did not constitute to violate his rights to be silent, and it was not excluded from the court3. Yarborough v. Alvarado (2004) a. Whether juvenile was “in custody” at police station, case involving murderb. No special treatment because of agec. Supreme Court denied the relevance of age 4. J.D.P v. North Carolina (2011)a. Supreme Court holds that students must receive Miranda warnings if questioned in schools. Age matters hereOverturning Miranda1. Dickerson v. US (2000) a. Supreme Court upheld Miranda2. Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010) a. Suspect must invoke right to remain silentb. Silence during interrogation do not invoke his right to remain silentc. “Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?” d. Thompkins replied “yes” (after 3 hours of silence) Constitutional Rights for Guantanamo inmates1. Miranda warnings2. Right to counsel- Boumedienne did not explicitly extend 6th Amendment rights. 3. Doesn’t matter if they are citizens or not, the rights still applySurgical Searches and Bodily Integrity1. Winston v. Lee (1985) a. suspected of attempting an armed robberyb. surgical procedure to remove bulletc. Is this an unreasonable search under the 4th amendment? Can’t make you undergo surgery2. Rochin v. California (1952) a. “stomach pump” caseb. Violation of due processc. Case where a man was at home and the police broke into his house; he put a pill down and the police tried to get him to dislodge the capsule and took him to the hospital. They wanted his stomach pumped to get the pillsd. It’s “conduct that shocks the conscious” – police force him to vomit morphine capsules to convict the man, drag him out of the bedroom. e. Supreme Court said this violated due process, before point and time of incorporation of 5th amendment Selective incapacitation- tried to develop profiles according to which one could predict the criminal behavior of people. It was designed to limit crime