Karteikarten
Police Test
Karten in diesem Stapel (53)
- 1Michigan v. Summersoccupants can be detained during search warrant to keep them from fleeing if evidence is found
- 2Maryland v. Buieprotective sweeps
- 3Chimel v. Californiaarm's reach doctrine
- 4Knowles v. Iowasearch incident to an arrest exception doesn't apply to a traffic citation
- 5Terry v. OhioStop and Frisk
- 65 conditions to stop and frisk1. observe unusual conduct
2. think person is armed
3. identify yourself as an officer
4. makes reasonable inquiry
5. fears for saftey - 75 Exigent circumstances1. prevent escape
2. prevent harm to the officers
3. prevent destruction of evidence
4. hot pursuit of criminal
5. render immediate aid to a person in need of assistance - 8Harris v. United Statesplain view contraband can be seized without a warrant
- 9Arizona v. HicksEvidence must be in plain view
- 10Abel v. United StatesIt is okay for abandon property to be searched; hotel room of abel
- 11California v. Greenwoodgarbage left on curb is fair gain
- 12California v. Hodariarrest of a fleeing suspect and collection of abandoned evidence is constitutional
- 13Carroll v. United Statescarroll doctrine; search of a car w/o a warrant
- 14New York v. Beltonarm's reach doctrine w/ cars
- 15California v. CarneyCarroll extended to motor homes
- 16United States v. Leon"good faith" exception, exclusionary rule is waived
- 17Burdeau v. McDowellBill of rights only apply to actions of government agents
- 18Brown v. Mississippipractice of brutality is put to an end
- 19McNabb v. United States"prompt arraignment"
- 20Escobedo v. Illinoisrequest of rights must be given, if denied a lawyer any evidence gathered is immiscible
- 21Miranda v. Arizona1. confessions are not to be corhorced
2. person does not have to testify against ...
3. know miranda warnings - 22Harris v. New Yorkstatements seen trustworthy can be used to attack witness on stand
- 23New York v. Quarles"public safety"
- 24Oregon v. Elstadno warning of miranda is not a violation os miranda
- 25Davis v. United statesperson must state that they do not want to talk and want a lawyer
- 26United States v. Wade1. suspect can be asked to do things that happen at crime
2. after indicted; a attorney can be present at lineup - 27Stoval v. Demoattorneys are not required at showups
- 28United States v. AshPhoto can be shown without lawyer or suspect.
- 29Weeks v. United States1.established the exclusionary rule
2. gave only federal court
3.gave way to the silver platter doctrine - 30Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States1. established "fruit of the poisonous tree"
- 31The silver platter doctrineEvidence gathered illegally can be given to a federal officer and used in federal court
- 32Wolf v. Coloradothat the Fourth Amendment was applicable to the States through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, however, the exclusionary rule was not
- 33Rochin V. California1. Landmark to develop the exclusionary rule
2. was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that added behavior that "shocks the conscience" into tests of what violates due process. - 34Mapp v. Ohiowas the vehicle the Supreme Court used for applying the exclusionary rule to state courts.
- 355th amendment restricts?police authority to arrest
- 364th amendment controls..arrest
- 37Atwater v. City of Lago VistaAtwater's arrest was satisfied constitutional; confirmed police can only make arrest when offense was committed in their presence
- 383 reasons officers can arrest a person..1. crime committed in presence
2. probable cause of committed felony
3. under authority of a arrest warrant - 39Payton v. New YorkConcerns warrantless entry into a private home; it is prohibited under 4th amendment
- 40Arrest made by police are based onProbable cause
- 41Probable Causeevidence, lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime was committed by a specific suspect
- 42Probable Cause is less than... but more thanbeyond reasonable doubt; reasonable suspicion
- 43Henry v. United Statesarrest must be made on more than suspicion; 4th amendment applies to arrest and searches
- 44Draper v. United Statesidentification of a suspect by a reliable informant may constitute probable cause for an arrest
- 45County of Riverside v. McLaughlinprobable cause must be proven w/ a judicial determination within 48hrs after arrest if arrested w/o a warrant
- 46Delaware v. Prousepolice cannot make capricious car stops; has to be a pattern or based on reasonable suspicion
- 47Pennsylvania v. MimmsOfficer can order a person to exit vehicle with a routine stop
- 48Michigan department of State Police v. Stlizbrief, suspicionless stops on highway checkpoints for combating drunk driving are legal.
- 49City of Indianapolis v. EdmondOfficers can not hold checkpoints to find drugs, only for DWI
- 50Minnesota v. Olsonan overnight guest has a sufficient expectation of privacy in host's dwelling and is entitled the 4th amendment
- 51Minnesota v. Carter4th amendment does not extend to a person who is present w/ consent of the householder
- 52Kyllo v. United Statesa warrant is needed to put surveillance in homes
- 53How are warrants obtained?typed affidavit and personally appears before a judge
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Karteikarten am Police Test, erstellt von mekco1993 am 09/05/2013.
- Erstellt von
- mekco1993 · Mai 2013
- Aktualisiert
- 12 Jan 2017
- Aufrufe
- 64
- Bewertung