THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS: THE INVESTIGATIVE PHASE CHAPTER 12

Take Note!!! You do not have to copy anything that is in red text!!

The Criminal Justice System includes everything that happens to an individual; investigation, arrest, prosecution, conviction, detention, and release Most crimes are prosecuted under State Law Typically all cases follow a certain process going from step to step. After arrest a person could be freed at any step of the process The Investigation is the important first step! The investigation, and following steps, must follow the laws and regulations set out by the Constitution and the Courts of the United States

ARREST IS WHEN A PERSON SUSPECTED OF A CRIME IS TAKEN INTO POLICE CUSTODY A PERSON CAN BE ARRESTED BY TWO WAYS 1. ARREST WARRANT 2. PROBABLE CAUSE

ARREST WARRANT IS A COURT ORDER REQUIRING THAT A PERSON BE TAKEN INTO POLICE CUSTODY PROBABLE CAUSE IS REASONABLE BELIEF THAT A PERSON HAS COMMITTED A CRIME

SEARCH AND SEIZURE AMERICANS ARE PROTECTED AGAINST UNWARRANTED SEARCH AND SEIZURES (4TH AMENDMENT) SEIZURE IS TAKING ANYTHING BY FORCE

Drug Courier Profile- suspected criminal based on typical age, race, personal appearance, behavior, and mannerisms of people trafficking drugs Police can establish probable cause based on information given to them from the community or informants Judges will base decisions on warrants or arrests based on many things but may include an informants track record, and corroboration by officers Corroborate- to confirm, usually by police officers of information given by a “layperson” Reasonable Suspicion- Evidence that justifies an officer in stopping and questioning a person believed to be involved in a crime [less evidence than Probable Cause]

Citizens of the United States expect to have a “right to privacy”, unfortunately there is no explicit “right to privacy” in the Constitution. There is obviously the 4th Amendment and the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, but that is only directed at the “state” not private citizens or companies. If there is an unwanted violation of privacy by a person or company their may be civil or even criminal action… peeping toms, trespassing, etc. As for the “state” dealing with searches and seizures there are limits but there are many exceptions to unreasonable searches and seizures.

SEARCH WARRANT IS A COURT ORDER THAT ALLOWS A CERTAIN PROPERTY TO BE SEARCHED POLICE MUST COMPLETE AN AFFIDAVIT WHICH IS A SWORN STATEMENT OF FACTS EXCLUSIONARY RULE EVIDENCE SEIZED IN AN ILLEGAL SEARCH CANNOT BE USED IN A TRIAL

SEARCHES W/O A WARRANT 1. SEARCH INCIDENT TO A LAWFUL ARREST THIS ALLOWS THE POLICE TO SEARCH A LAWFULLY ARRESTED PERSON 2. STOP AND FRISK THIS ALLOWS FOR THE SEARCH OF A PERSON WHO IS ACTING SUSPICIOUSLY

3. CONSENT A PERSON VOLUNTARILY AGREES TO BE SEARCHED 4. PLAIN VIEW IF AN OBJECT IS IN PLAIN VIEW OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CONTRABAND IS ANY ILLEGAL ITEM 5. HOT PURSUIT POLICE ARE ALLOWED TO FOLLOW A SUSPECT INTO A BUILDING

6. VEHICLE SEARCHES POLICE OFFICERS ARE ALLOWED TO SEARCH A VEHICLE IF THEY FEEL THAT THE VEHICLE CONTAINS CONTRABAND 7. EMERGENCY SITUATIONS IN AN EMERGENCY, POLICE CAN ENTER A BUILDING WITHOUT A WARRANT 8. BORDER AND AIRPORT SEARCHES CUSTOMS AGENTS ARE ALLOWED TO SEARCH INDIVIDUALS AND LUGGAGE WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE

Racial Profiling in Police Investigations Racial Profiling- Inappropriate use of race as a factor identifying people who may break or have broken the law Profiling can take the form of inappropriate police action based on ethnicity, national origin, or religion as well as race. Example: Searching an “Arab” looking person because of that at an airport The general rule is that it is inappropriate for an officer to stop a person SOLEY based on his or her race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion.

INTERROGATIONS INTERROGATE– TO QUESTION POLICE HAVE THE RIGHT TO INTERROGATE A SUSPECT

3 IMPT SUPREME COURT CASES 1. MIRANDA V ARIZONA (1966)– THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT A DEFENDANT MUST BE READ THEIR RIGHTS MIRANDA RIGHTS 1. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT

2. IF YOU GIVE UP THAT RIGHT, ANYTHING YOU SAY CAN BE USED AGAINST YOU 3. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO AN ATTORNEY 4. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD ONE, ONE WILL BE PROVIDED FOR YOU

2. NJ V TLO (1985)– PRINCIPAL IS ALLOWED TO SEARCH A STUDENTS LOCKER, CAR, PERSON, ETC. The Supreme Court has granted public schools broad powers to search without warrants or even “probable cause”, because of the interest to protect ALL students from dangers [Drugs, alcohol, weapons, bombs]

3. MAPP V OHIO (1961)– THE SUPREME COURT THAT EVIDENCE GAINED ILLEGALLY CANNOT BE USED AGAINST A DEFENDANT