Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

4th Amendment: Searches, Factors, Search Incident to Arrest, Arrest…

- - - - The 4th Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and it is made applicable to the states through the 14th Amendment.
        
        General Rule: Probable Cause + Warrant
        
        Probable Cause
        
        Exceptions
        
        Automobile Exception
        
        Rationale
        
        1 more item...
        
        Scope
        
        1 more item...
        
        Trigger
        
        1 more item...
        
        Consent
        
        Scope
        
        1 more item...
        
        Rationale
        
        1 more item...
        
        Trigger
        
        1 more item...
        
        Requirements
        
        2 more items...
        
        Giving and Taking Consent Away
        
        1 more item...
        
        Probable Cause to Search
        
        Probable Cause to Arrest
        
        Warrrant
        
        Exceptions
        
        Warrantless searches of the automobile are allowed if there is PC to believe that the vehicle contains evidence of crime.
        
        Carrol v. U.S.
        
        Consent
        
        See Probable cause side for steps
        
        Plain View Doctrine
        
        trigger
        
        1 more item...
        
        scope
        
        1 more item...
        
        rationale
        
        1 more item...
        
        1) Police are lawfully in a position from which they view an object; 2) the incriminating character of the object is readily apparent; and 3) the officer has a lawful right of access to the object, they may seize it without a warrant (Hicks, Long).
- - - - : (1) a person exhibits an actual expectation of privacy in the object of the search (subjective prong), and (2) the expectation of privacy is one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable (objective prong)
        
        Trespass Doctrine
        
        US v Jones
        
        Governmental trespass into private property (protected area) for the purpose of obtaining information is a search within the meaning of the 4th
        
        Technology
        
        Cell Site Location Info "CSLI"
        
        Before compelling a wireless carrier to turn over a subscriber’s CSLI, the Government’s obligation is to get a warrant.
        
        Rationale?
        
        We decline to grant the state unrestricted access to a wireless carrier’s database of physical location information. In light of the deeply revealing nature of CSLI, its depth, breadth, and comprehensive reach, and the inescapable and automatic nature of its collection, the fact that such information is gathered by a third party does not make it any less deserving of Fourth Amendment protection. The Government’s acquisition of the cell-site records here was a search under that Amendment.”
        
        Cell Phone
        
        Riley v California
        
        A cell phone can be seized as part of a search incident to arrest, but the information contained in the cell phone, cannot be viewed or accessed without a warrant. The court reasoned that modern smart phones possess too much information to allow searches without warrants.
        
        Thermal Imager
        
        Kyllo v. U.S.
        
        Government warrantless use of a device that is not in general public use, to explore the details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion is a search and unreasonable
  - - - Schools - New Jersey v. TLO
    - - Issue
        
        Whether every detainee who will be admitted to the general population may be required to undergo a close visual inspection while undressed.
      - Rule
        
        When an arrestee will join the general population of a jail, correctional officials must be permitted to devise reasonable search policies to detect and deter the possession of contraband in their facilities, to include strip searches.
      - Rationale
        
        Correctional officials have a legitimate interest, indeed a responsibility, to ensure that jails are not made less secure by reason of what new detainees may carry in on their bodies. Facility personnel, other inmates, and the new detainee himself or herself may be in danger if these threats are introduced into the jail population.
      - Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington
- - - - Pen Register
        
        Smith v. Maryland
        
        A person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the numbers dialed in his telephone because the numbers were voluntarily conveyed to the telephone company.
      - Bank Records
        
        U.S. v. Miller
        
        A bank depositor has no legitimate expectation of privacy in financial information voluntarily conveyed to banks and exposed to their employees in the ordinary course of business.
      - Informant
        
        U.S. v. White
        
        It is not objectively reasonable to expect privacy in what one knowingly volunteers to a third person, whether recorded or transmitted, since one assumed the risk that this information will be later conveyed to the government.
      - Curtillage
        
        California v. Greenwood
        
        A person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in garbage left for collection outside of the curtilage of a home.
  - - - What is a Curtilage?
        
        The area immediately surrounding the home is called the curtilage and receives 4th Amendment protection. In Dunn v. US the Court identified four factors a court should weight when determining whether the area in question constitutes curtilage:
        
        (2) Whether the area is within an enclosure surrounding the home
        
        (3) the nature of the areas uses
        
        (1) the areas proximity to the home
        
        (4) Steps taken to protect the area from observation
      - Helicopter
        
        Florida v. Riley
        
        The government is free to inspect the curtilage with the naked eye from the vantage point of an aircraft flying within navigable airspace accessible to the public. As a general proposition, the police may see what may be seen from a public vantage point where they have a right to be.
- - - - Any custodial arrest supported by probable cause is sufficient to trigger a search incident to arrest.
- - - - Incident to a lawful arrest police may search the arrestee’s person and the area within his immediate control defined as the area from within which he might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence (p. 141). If the arrest occurs within a home police may search the drawers within an arrestee’s reach because of the danger their contents might pose to them
    - - Upon a lawful arrest of an occupant of a vehicle, police as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the passenger compartment of that automobile and the contents of any containers found therein.
        
        Arizona v. Gant
        
        Police search of a vehicle incident to a recent arrest only when the arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search or when it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be found in the vehicle.