Study Guide for Test 2

Seite 1

Court Cases

Need to Know:

topic

summary

relevance

Frye v. United States (1923)

Topic --> polygraph tests, admissibility of expert testimony

Summary --> discussed the admissibility of polygraph tests as evidence; held that expert testimony must be based on scientific methods that are sufficiently established and accepted

Relevance

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Topic --> self-incrimination, right to counsel

Summary --> ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their right to an attorney and against self-incrimination

Relevance

Terry v. Ohio (1968)

Topic --> warrantless searches and seizures

Summary --> held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when an officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks them without probable cause to arrest if the officer does have reasonable articulable suspicion of the crime and that the person is armed and dangerous

Relevance

Illinois v. Gates (1983)

Topic --> totality of circumstances, probable cause

Summary --> replaced the Aguilar-Sprinelli test for probable cause with the "totality of circumstances" test

Relevance

Maryland v. Buie (1990)

Topic --> protective sweeps

Summary --> held that a properly limited protective sweep in conjunction with an in-home arrest based on reasonable articulable suspicion that there is danger does not violate the Fourth Amendment

Relevance

Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993)

Topic --> plain touch

Summary --> permits the seizure of contraband detected through touch during a protective patdown (plain touch/feel doctrine)

Relevance

Arizona v. Gant (2009)

Topic --> warrantless search and seizure in vehicles

Summary --> held that the Fourth Amendment requires officers to demonstrate public safety or danger of destruction of evidence to justify a warrantless vehicular search incident to arrest

Relevance

Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010)

Topic --> Miranda rights, voluntary statements

Summary --> considered the position of a suspect who understands the right to remain silent but does not explicitly invoke or waive it; they held that unless and until the suspect explicitly invokes their right to remain silent, voluntary statements could be used

Relevance

Howes v. Fields (2012)

Topic --> custodial interrogation of prisoners

Summary --> decided that prisoners need not be Mirandized when questioned since they are not in a custodial interrogation

Relevance

Jones v. United States (2012)

Topic --> GPS tracking devices

Summary --> held that installing a GPS tracking device on a vehicle to track location constitutes as a search, which means it requires a probable cause warrant

Relevance

Perry v. New Hampshire (2012)

Topic --> eyewitness testimony

Summary --> held that judicial examination of eye-witness testimony isn't required except in the case of police misconduct

Relevance

Florida v. Jardines (2013)

Topic --> police dogs, searches

Summary --> held that use of police dogs on front porches of private homes constitutes a search, which means it requires a probable cause warrant

Relevance

Missouri v. McNeely (2013)

Topic --> blood tests

Summary --> protection from warrantless searches and seizures applies to blood tests except under exigent circumstances

Relevance

Seite 2

Chapter 13 Topics

Know the definitions and hypothetical scenarios of:

Interrogation --> when officers question a person they suspect has committed a crime

Confession --> a voluntary statement by a person that they are guilty of a crime

Admission --> a voluntary statement that a fact or state of events is true

Know the definition and rules of:

Voluntariness Requirement --> common law, constitutional law, and statutory law all require voluntariness in confessions; confessions can be mentally, emotionally, or physically coerced; the totality of circumstances is considered when determining voluntariness

Custodial Interrogations Requirement --> Miranda warnings are required for custodial interrogations; the totality of circumstances is considered when determining if someone is in custody

Know Miranda v. Arizona (1966) and its details:

Case

Year

Meaning and Why

Rules

Exceptions

Multiple Interrogations --> multiple interrogations can only take place when the second interrogation is for a separate and unrelated crime; each separate interrogation requires its own Miranda warnings

Reinterrogations --> reinterrogations can only take place when enough time or intervening circumstances has occurred

Violating Miranda

Know the Sixth Amendment and how it works with the Fifth Amendment.

Know about electronic surveillance systems and their details:

Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control Act and Safe Streets Act of 1968 --> also known as Title III or the Federal Wiretap Act; prohibits wiretapping, bugging, or other electronic surveillance of a conversation when there is a reasonable expectation of privacy

Patriot Act --> the Patriot Act amended all surveillance statutes, broadening the power of government officials across the board

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) --> regulates the collection of foreign intelligence by government officials; broadened by the Patriot Act

Wiretaps

Tracking Devices

Stored Communications

Pen Registers and Trap Devices

The Fourth Amendment's Minimizing Irrelevant Information Clause

Know the pretrial identification procedures and their details:

Eyewitness Identification

Photographs

Fingerprints

Blood Tests

DNA Analysis

Voice Tests

Polygraph Tests