Flashcards
Criminal Procedure Final
Cards in this deck (123)
- 1Case that established the exclusionary rule in federal casesWeeks vs United States
- 2Case that applied the exclusionary rule to state casesMapp vs. Ohio
- 3Type of hearing in whether or not a court decides to exclude evidenceSuppression hearing
- 4Amendment that contains privilege against self-incrimination5th Amendment
- 5Case that established the good faith exceptionUnited States vs. Leon
- 6Term used to describe evidence indirectly by the exclusionary ruleFruits of a poisonous tree
- 7This case upheld the constitutionality of sobriety checkpointsMichigan vs Sitz
- 8This case recognized constitutional protections for juvenilesIn Re Gault
- 9This case (1 of 2) gave us a definition for probable causeKatz vs United States
- 10This case discussed the purged taint doctrineWong Son vs United States
- 11This case established the drug courier profile ruleSokolow vs United States
- 12The exercise of control by the government over a person or thingSeizure
- 13The government's intrusion into a person's expectation of privacySearch
- 14This doctrine is used to define areas that are not within a person's reasonable expectation of privacyOpen Fields Doctrine
- 15This rule permits searches of property belonging to one that is not a suspectThird Party Premises Rule
- 16This test is used to determine whether the method used by police in a search is constitutionalShock the Conscience Test
- 17The type of evidence protected by the privilege against self-incriminationTestimonial
- 18Punishment for failure to testify when no privilege existsContempt of Court
- 19Two types of ImmunityUse Immunity and Transactional Immunity
- 20This test is used to determine whether testimony is incriminatingMust provide a link in the chain to prosecute
- 21Case that requires police to give rights to suspectsMiranda vs Arizona
- 22Confessions obtained by coercion are considered to be inadmissible because they are ______.Involuntary
- 23The Amendment that guarantees the right to counsel6th Amendment
- 24The reason that a voluntary confession is NOT a violation of the privilege against self-incriminationIt is not compelled
- 25Exception to the Miranda Rule (Exclusionary Rule as well)Public Safety Exception
- 26First 10 AmendmentsBill of Rights
- 27The states must provide fundamental fairness in their criminal proceedingsDue Process Clause
- 28the balance or impartiality (of a court proceeding) that is essential to due processFundamental Fairness
- 29the Supreme Court incorporated certain parts of certain amendments, rather than incorporating an entire amendment at once.Selective Incorporation
- 30the process of applying all the rules in the Bill of Rights to the states by interpreting the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.Total incorporation
- 31Taking the language of the amendments dealing with criminal procedure (4th, 5th, 6th,8th), that protection is included in the 14th Amendment which is applicable on the statesIncorporation Doctrine
- 32This case led to the incorporation doctrine; it held that the 5th amendment was only applicable in federal cases, not state onesBarron vs Baltimore
- 33This case decided that the right to a jury trial is applicable to the statesDuncan vs Louisiana
- 34Rule states that any evidence that is obtained by the government in violation of a defendants constitutional rights, is not admissible in the defendants criminal trial as proof of guiltExclusionary Rule
- 35A rule that states that if the police do obtain evidence unconstitutionally, if the government can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the court, it is just a matter of time before the same evidence that was obtained illegally would have been discovered by police in a constitutional mannerInevitable Discovery Rule
- 36Police engage in some unconstitutional conduct (ex: search a residence without warrant) → they seize evidence → seized evidence becomes tainted and is inadmissible against the defendant as proof of guilt at trial However, when a suspect voluntarily hands over the evidence before the police find it during their search, that evidence is admissible in courtPurged Taint Exception
- 37The suspect files a suppression motion, with the basis that there was not probable cause for the original search The trial judge agrees with the motion, and decides that there was not probable cause, and in state courts that do not have the good faith exception that evidence is thrown out As long as the police acted in good faith (didn’t lie or mislead) and it was a “close call”, those cases won’t apply the exclusionary ruleGood Faith Exception
- 38a reasonable person would believe that a crime was in the process of being committed, had been committed, or was going to be committedProbable Cause
- 39depriving someone of their liberty by legal authority, stating that a person is under arrest is not necessary, or when due to police conduct, a reasonable person believes that they are not free to move or leaveArrest
- 40document issued by a judge or magistrate that authorizes the police to take someone accused of a crime into custodyArrest Warrant
- 41police cannot arrest someone in their own home without an arrest warrant UNLESS there are exigent circumstancesHome Arrest Rule
- 42The case that defines probable cause for arrestsBeck vs Ohio
- 43The case that determines at which point a suspect is under arrest during a chaseCalifornia vs. Hadari D
1. When the suspect is caught
2. When the suspect gives up - 44Exceptions to an arrest warrant1. If the crime that the police are arresting the suspect for is a felony
2. If the crime committed is a misdemeanor committed IN THE PRESENCE of a police officer
3. Any arrest made in a public space - 45Case that said bringing a suspect into custody for questioning IS subject to the same probable cause standards as an arrestDunaway vs New York
- 46Police must knock and announce prior to search; Knock or ring the doorbell, announce they are law enforcement, and their purposeAnnouncement Requirement
- 47an exigent circumstance that allows police to arrest a criminal suspect on private property without a warrantHot Pursuit
- 48An officer is allowed to conduct a “Terry Stop”, which is a brief detention, long enough for the officer to ask the people at the scene basic questions about the suspected criminal activity. Police must observe unusual conduct leading to reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot, and if so, the officer can briefly detain a person for basic questioning. If something during the detention gives the police probable cause, they can make an arrestTerry vs Ohio
- 49When concerning the 4th Amendment, it protects against ONLY conduct from the government or a person acting on the government's behalfGovernment Conduct Requirement
- 50Search warrant must describe with reasonable certainty, preciseness, and clarity what is to be found and where. Cannot be vaguePreciseness Requirement
- 51A search warrant has to be issued by a ________.Neutral and Detached Magistrate
- 52Conducted by the government w/o warrants, oftentimes without any cause necessary to protect the general health and safety of the public Ex. metal detectors, airports, administrative agencies (health inspections, etc.)Administrative Searches
- 53Case that decided the 4th Amendment applies to the states as well as the governmentWolf vs Ohio
- 54Case that decided it was a violation of 4th Amendment rights to wiretap a public payphoneUnited States vs Katz
- 55Area outside but close to a residence or it could be a building other than the residence where activities of daily life occur, are subject to the 4th Amendment protectionsCurtilage
- 56The case that established thresholds for curtilageUnited States vs Dunn
- 57Case that decided when determining probable cause, the courts look at the totality of the circumstancesIllinois vs Gates
- 58Case that said it was unconstitutional to compel surgery in a search warrantWinston vs Lee
- 59Case that decided making someone throw up drugs that were ingested for evidence "shocked the conscience"Rochin vs California
- 60Case where the Supreme Court ruled that a violation of the knock and announce rule is not so serious that if violated would require the suppression of evidence seized -The exclusionary rule does not apply -Federal LawHudson vs Michigan
- 61Holds that when the police are legally where they are allowed to be standing, and they find evidence or contraband that is not listed in the search warrant, they may still seize itPlain View Doctrine
- 62Exceptions to search warrant requirement rule (9)1. Searches that are incident to lawful arrest
2. Inventory Search
3. Automobile search
4. Plain view doctrine
5. Terry stop
6. Consent
7. Emergency Situations
8. Administrative searches
9. Public schools - 63Case that decided when police have probable cause that there is evidence or contraband in a vehicle, the police may search that vehicle without getting a search warrantUnited States vs Carroll
- 64Case that regards: School officials may conduct these types of searches without any warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion simply on the grounds that to do so is necessary to protect the school environment from drugs, guns, and other affronts to order and disciplineNew Jersey vs T.L.O.
- 65Case that declared it was unconstitutional to do a full strip search of a student in possession of prescription strength ibuprofenSafford School District vs Redding
- 66a title used to identify an individual human beingNatural person
- 67Your PASI is waived if you answer or begin to answer a question that will incriminate youWaiver
- 68The government can eliminate someone’s privilege against self-incrimination if the government promises the witness that they will not prosecute them, then the testimony can no longer be incriminatingImmunity (it is forced, not an option)
- 69a promise by the government that they will not use the testimony of the witness in any way, however, if the government has other, independent evidence, against the witness for the same crime, then they can prosecute the witness for that crimeUse immunity
- 70a promise by the government that they will not prosecute the defendant involving the illegal transactions they were involved inTransactional immunity
- 71This case invoked the 5th Amendment in state criminal proceedings; no person should be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against themselvesMalloy vs Hogan
- 72Case that decided PASI can only be used during testimonySchmerber vs. California
- 73This case established that when invoking your PASI, the evidence being withheld MUST be incriminatingHoffman vs the United States
- 74A type of hearing in which the judge decides whether or not a piece of testimony will be incriminatingIn-camera hearing
- 75When police question a suspect that is in custodyCustodial Interrogation
- 76Case that established that your rights must be recited to you before police questioningMiranda vs Arizona
- 77This case switched the burden of Miranda onto the suspect, stating that the suspect must now speak up to invoke MirandaMichigan vs Tompkins
- 78A common police ID procedure in which a group of photos is showed to the victim to try and identify a suspectPhoto Arrays
- 79A common police ID procedure in which a group of people are lined up in front of a victim to try and identify a suspectLine Ups
- 80When the victim tells the police that they can identify the offender, and a person is being detained at the scene, and the police take the victim to the scene, and ask the victim if that is the person that assaulted themShow ups
- 81Where the right to counsel existsCritical Stage
- 82Upon request, the government has to turn over to the defense all exculpatory materialBrady Material
- 83-Last part of an initial appearance - purpose is to help ensure that the defendant will appear at all future court proceedings in which they are ordered to do soBail
- 84requires the defendant to give the prosecution copies of any pretrial statements that a defense witness gave during discoveryReciprocal Discovery
- 85-Information in the form of reports, statements that the police have summaries, letters, all in the possession of the government that relate to the witness -Government does not have to turn it in until after the witness’s testimonyJencks Act Material
- 86-The duty to disclose requires that the defense make a request; there is no duty on the government -Any oral statements that the defendant made to the police -Any written or reported statements that the defendant made to the police -The defendant’s prior criminal record -Any reports regarding physical or mental examination of the defendant -Any other expert reports to be used at trial -Any other documents or objects the government intends to use at trialRule 16 of the federal rules of criminal procedure (pretrial)
- 87Duty of the government to disclose information that they have to the defense at the appropriate point in time after charges have been formally brought against the defendantDisclosure
- 88sets forth the crimes the defendant is being charged forpolice complaint
- 89a police administrative procedure, to prepare a record of the arrest. They try to gather as much information about the defendant as they can such as name and addressbooking
- 90the arrestee gets notice of the charges Constitutionally, there is no requirement that the police advise an arrestee of what they are being charged with The arrestee is given a copy of the police complaint Arrestee is advised of their right to counsel They differ in that in some jurisdictions, there is a very brief probable cause hearing, where the magistrate decides if there is probable cause to hold the defendant for the next stage, which is a preliminary hearing In many states, this step is eliminated, and it will be dealt with in a later preliminary hearing In most states, where there is a probable cause hearing, the defendant has a right to a lawyer at the initial appearanceinitial appearance
- 91allows judges to withhold bail altogether from a defendant if they were deemed by the judge as a danger to the community, or there is no set of conditions that could guarantee the defendant’s appearance at trialpreventative detention
- 92decided preventative detentionUnited States vs Salerno (1987)
- 93they don’t really need to come up with the money, but, if they abscond, they are responsible to pay that amountunsecured bond
- 94Whether they are a repeated offender If they have ties to the community Ex: family, a job, If the person is transient Nature of the crime If the defendant has any record or history of missing court appearances Consider the defendant’s criminal recordfactors to consider when setting/denying bail
- 95What is the standard of proof in a grand jury?probable cause
- 96How many votes are required for an indictment in a grand jury?minimum of 12
- 97this is given when the grand jury officially votes in favor of indicting the suspecttrue bill of indictment
- 98this is an alternative to a grand jury, where the charges that are being brought to the defendent will be made and includes a preliminary hearingcriminal information system
- 99ID procedure must be _______ and ________ for it to countadversarial and confrontational
- 100after there has been a finding of probable cause, a case becomes adversarial only AFTER a grand jury or criminal information, aka after formal charges have been brought (majority view) OR after arrest, with no formal charges yet (minority view)adversarial
- 101means that the suspect has to be directly involved in the ID procedure Ex: court documentsconfrontational
- 102this case decided that there is no constitutional right to counsel for an identification that takes place before the accused is indicted or formally charged.Kirby vs Illinois (1972)
- 103Supreme Court said that an ID procedure is unconstitutional if it is unnecessarily suggestive The victim HAS to tell the police beforehand that they can make an IDStovall vs Denno (1967)
- 104amendment that deals with the right to a speedy trial6th amendment
- 105Decided the 4 factors listed below 1. Length of the delay 2. Reason for the delay A deliberate effort from the government to hinder the defense weighs heavily against the government Overcrowded courts (weighs less heavily against gov) Maybe a valid reason such as a missing government witness Delay caused by the defense counsel weighs against the defendant 3. Degree to which the defendant during the delayed period is complaining to the court 4. Harm or prejudice suffered by the defendantBarker vs Wingo (1972)
- 106(1) understand the nature of the proceedings, (2) has to be able to effectively communicate with their lawyertest for legal competence
- 107the ________ is full of rights that belong to the defendant at trial6th amendment
- 108SCOTUS made a ruling that made clear that in all jury trials, the jury’s verdict must be unanimousRamos vs Louisiana (2020)
- 109The process of asking potential jurors questions Have to have a cause for dismissing a juror “for cause”voir dire
- 110with the remaining group, each side is allowed to exclude a limited amount of jurors without having any causeperemptory challenges
- 111Deals with race in selecting juriesBatson vs Kentucky
- 112SCOTUS ruled that in all criminal cases, the defendant had the right to a lawyer and if indigent, unable to hire a lawyer, they were entitled to have a lawyer provided to them from the government at no cost to themGideon vs Wainwright (1960s)
- 113The defendant has the right to subpoena witnesses to come in to court to testify on their behalfthe defendant's right to compulsory process
- 114Defendant has the right to confront all witnesses against themthe defendant's right to confrontation
- 115Double Jeopardy does not apply to pretrial dismissals If at the preliminary hearing, the magistrate decides that there is no probable cause, so they dismiss the charge Police can withdraw a complaint If the government wishes to dismiss charges after formal charges have been brought, they file a Nolle Prosqui When there is a mistrial, double jeopardy does not apply, the defendant can still be tried again When the defendant appeals their initial verdict, and the appellate court grants them a new trialexceptions to double jeopardy
- 116(1) reasons of “manifest necessity” (nobody’s fault) Something has happened where the judge has to declare a mistrial (common example is a hung jury) Juror issues Issues with the judge (2) When a prejudicial event occurs Ex: if the jury sees the defendant in shackles, if a witness refers to a defendant’s previous criminal record If the prejudicial event was the result of prosecutorial misconduct, then double jeopardy applies because the judge declares a mistrial with prejudice, the case cannot be retriedMistrials occur for two main reasons:
- 117If the government wishes to dismiss charges after formal charges have been brought, they file a _______Nolle Prosqui
- 118A person can be charged in both the federal and state system with the same crime, and it does not violate double jeopardydual sovereignties rule
- 119SCOTUS declared that the guidelines for sentencing were advisory and not mandatory Judges had to have reasons and factors to depart from the established guidelinesBooker vs United States
- 120the defendant holds a right to address the court regarding their sentencingThe defendant’s right of allocution:
- 121SCOTUS ruled that the death penalty was being imposed discriminatorily by race and that there had to be standards for judges and juries to use when imposing the death penaltyUnited States vs Formen (1972)
- 122SCOTUS decided that the death penalty was constitutionalUnited States vs Gregg (1976)
- 123SCOTUS held that the standard of proof in a juvenile proceeding was the same as in adult court, proof beyond a reasonable doubtIn Re Winship (1969)
Information
- Description
- Law Flashcards on Criminal Procedure Final, created by Kristen Thomas on 21/10/2023.
- Created by
- Kristen Thomas
- Views
- 6
- Rating