1. Slide 1 III. Criminal Procedure and the Constitution A.Analyze and Define Criminal Procedure B.Analyze the provisions of the 4 th and 5 th Amendments pertaining to your right to be free from illegal searches and seizures and your right to remain silent C.Comprehend affect of U.S. Supreme Court decision in Miranda v. Arizona D.Define the Exclusionary Rule and the Plain View Doctrine BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution Lesson Objectives

2. Slide 2 III. Criminal Procedure and the Constitution D.The Exclusionary Rule and the Plain View Doctrine 1) The exclusionary rule is a judge-made rule that evidence obtained by the government in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights can't be used against him or her. 2) By filing a motion to suppress before the trial asking the judge to rule the evidence as inadmissible, a defendant may prevent the prosecution from using illegally obtained evidence. 3) The exclusionary rule usually applies to suppression of physical evidence (for example, a murder weapon, stolen property, or illegal drugs) that the police seize in violation of a defendant's Fourth Amendment right not to be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution

3. Slide 3 III. Criminal Procedure and the Constitution D.The Exclusionary Rule and the Plain View Doctrine 4.Weeks v. U.S. (1914) a)The exclusionary rule was created by the U.S. Supreme Court in Weeks v. U.S. b)Weeks is premised on the idea that when the police exceed their constitutional authority in conducting a search, then that search must be null and void and any evidence discovered as a result of that search cannot be used at trial. 5.Mapp v. Ohio (1961) a)The U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed that evidence obtained in violation of the 4 th Amendment may not be used in criminal prosecutions. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution

4. Slide 4 III. Criminal Procedure and the Constitution D.The Exclusionary Rule and the Plain View Doctrine 6.U.S. v. Leon (1984) a)In U.S. v. Leon, the U.S. Supreme Court carved out the good faith exception : if the police make an honest mistake in conducting a search—that is, if the police act on the basis of a search warrant which a court later declares invalid—the seized evidence is still admissible. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution

5. Slide 5 III. Criminal Procedure and the Constitution D.The Exclusionary Rule and the Plain View Doctrine 7) THE PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE a)The Plain View Doctrine allows an officer to seize – without a warrant – evidence and contraband found in plain view during a lawful observation. b)For the plain view doctrine to apply for discoveries, the three- prong Horton test requires: 1.The officer to be lawfully present at the place where the evidence can be plainly viewed, 2.The officer to have a lawful right of access to the object, and 3.The incriminating character of the object to be “immediately apparent.” BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution

6. Slide 6 III. Criminal Procedure and the Constitution D.The Exclusionary Rule and the Plain View Doctrine 7) THE PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE f)In Terry v. Ohio, (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court which held that the 4 th Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous. g)For their own protection, police may perform a quick surface search of the person’s outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution

7. Slide 7 III. Criminal Procedure and the Constitution D.The Exclusionary Rule and the Plain View Doctrine 7) THE PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE c)In order for the officer to seize the item, the officer must have probable cause to believe the item is evidence of a crime or is contraband. The police may not move objects to get a better view. d)In Arizona v. Hicks, (1987), While investigating a shooting, the officer moved, without probable cause, stereo equipment to record the serial numbers. the officer was found to have acted unlawfully. e) The plain view doctrine has also been expanded to include the sub doctrines of plain feel, plain smell, and plain hearing. BHS Law Related Education Program Criminal Justice Lesson 3 : Criminal Procedure and the Constitution