What case gives us the reasonable expectation of privacy rule i.e. 1. Subjective expectation of privacy + 2. Objective expectation or reasonable expectation of privacy?

policy point: 4th protects people not places

What case gives us the rule that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy where the information is shared with another person (false friend)?

Note: Case also allows officer to hide in false friend's home & to put a wire on the false friend.

What case gives us the following 3 rules:

1. Information given to obtain a service (i.e. telephone numbers, account balance) does not contain information protected by the 4th.

2. A Citizen assumes the risk that information disclosed to a business "in the ordinary course of business" will be given to government.

3. Assumption of the risk = no subjective nor objective expectation of privacy 

What 3 rules do we get from Smith v. Maryland?

What case kicks off the open fields doctrine?

[entry of an open field does not implicate the 4th]

What group of cases give us the rule that any unoccupied/undeveloped area outside of the curtilage of a home constitutes an "open field"?

Note: No social interest in protecting privacy in open fields.

What case gives us the 4 factor test for defining curilage?

1. Proximity of the area claimed to be curtilage

2. Within the enclosure surrounding the home

3. Nature of the use to which the area is put

4. Steps taken to protect the area from view by passerbyers.

What case gives us the following rules and principle?

1. Seizure occurs when there is some meaningful intereference with an individual's possessory interest in that property.

2. Unlike Kyllo, technology can be used here b/c it is used in a public place (could be legally seen without a warrant).

3. Seizable Objects: (a) Contraband [illegal to own] (b) Fruits of crime $$ (c)Instrumentalities [car, gun] (d) Mere evidence [item help in conviction] 

What case gives us the "totality of the circumstances" standard for determining the veracity of an anonymous tip? Thus under this standard a lack of credibility of one element can be made up for by credibility of another.

"probable cause is a fluid concept"

What case gives us the terry version of determining the veracity of confidential informant tips?

[reasonable suspicion standard] specificity and predictability required to corroborate tip of CI information.

Reasonable suspicion is a less demanding standard than probable cause not only in the sense that reasonable suspicion can be established with information that is different in quantity or content than that required to establish probable cause, but also in the sense that reasonable suspicion can arise from information that is less RELIABLE than that required to show probable cause.  REASONABLE SUSPICION=SOME MINIMAL LEVEL OF OBJECTIVE JUSTIFICATION, PARTICULAR AND ARTICULABLE, MORE THAN JUST A HUNCH

What case gives us the rule that you need more than mere PC to enter and arrest a person in their home?

Note: this is for a routine felony arrest & without a valid exception 

What case gives us the requirements of a warrant--most notably--the requirement that the magistrate be detached & impartial?

The other requirements include: (a) must particularly describe the things to be seized and the places to be searched (b) and not be used to justify general or open-ended searches.

What case tells us that you must knock and announce unless you have a reasonable suspicion that suspects are armed/dangerous or will destroy evidence if there is a knock and announce?

Note: (a) you can get judicial approval (b) there is no remedy for violation. 

What case gives us the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement?

[anything found during search is allowable so long as exigency still exists.]

What case gives us the rule that you may only search the person and anything within immediate control of the suspect i.e. can't search the entire house.

bonus: what are you search for?

What rule does Chimel v. California give us?

What case gives us the scope of search incident to arrest (shocks the conscience)?

Language of the case: "Illegally breaking into the privacy of petitioner's home, the struggle to open his mouth and remove what was there, the forcible extraction of his stomach's contents--this course of proceeding is bound to offend even the hardened sensibilities."

What case overturned Gant and gave us the rule that search of a vehicle is only justified when there is an officer safety issue b/c the suspect is not restrained or evidence of the cause for arrest might be found?

[Trunk is excluded]

What case gives us pretextual stops?

[court refuses to look at subjective reasons/intentions of police officers as to why suspect was pulled over. but cannot be based on race]

What case created the auto exception?

[Automobiles may be searched without a warrant, provided there is PC b/c can be quickly moved out of jurisdiction]

What case gives us the greater (back to station) and lesser (on the spot) intrusions in car searches?

[Given PC either course is reasonable under the 4th]

What case gives us the following 2 rules?

1. Mobile home is a car and not a home if readily accessible to a roadway & not attached.

2. Probable cause allows for full search of vehicle.

What case explains inventory searches?

Policy reasons

-Protect owner's property

-Protect police from claims

-Theft or vandalism

-Determine if stolen

But

[May not be used to search for evidence of criminal activity. Must be conducted pursuant to standardized departmental regulations so as to limit officer discretion and protect against using automobile inventory searches as a ruse for criminal investigations.] 

What case gives us the rule that you can search containers in a vehicle regardless of the owner?

Note: Just need PC -- but probably not the person.

What case gives us the plain view exception?

1. Incriminating nature immediately apparent.

2. In plain view.

3. Officer has legal access to the area [warrant or exception] (or the person is knowingly exposing it to the public)

What case gives us the plain touch doctrine?

[incriminating nature must be immediately apparent]

What case reduces the definition of voluntary & knowing consent to not requiring that the person know his/her rights?

Rather it requires a Totality of the Circumstances to determine if consent was voluntary and knowing.

What case gives us the rule that a physically present co-occupant's stated refusal to permit entry prevails, rendering the warrantless search unreasonable and invalid as to him/her?

Note: this case is distinguished from Matlock b/c both tenants were not present in Matlock.

[Remember: may still enter for (a) exigency (b) community care-taking or (c) warrant]

What case gives us the man of reasonable caution exception to the consent exception?

[Would the facts available to the officer at the moment warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that the consenting party had authority over the premises?]

What case gives us the following two rules?

1. Consent means no coercion, no seizure.

2. Seizure only if, in view of all circumstances, a reasonable person would believe they were not free to leave.

Factors: (a) Threatening presence of several cops(show of force)

(b) Display of weapons

(c) Touching

(d) Harsh language or tone

(e) Full arrest versus brief detention.

[break down the analysis]

What case gives us "if a reasonable person would feel free to end the encounter a seizure has not occurred"?

Factors: Application of force -- Overwhelming show of force -- Do cops brandish weapon -- Are there intimidating movements -- Is there free space for suspect to move or leave -- Politeness

What case gave officers the ability to briefly detain and search a person if the officer (a) suspects continued criminal wrongdoing (b) has reasonable belief that there might be a danger to the public or the officers?

Note: If the incriminate nature of an item is immediately apparent the officer may seize it.

What case gives us the rule that a person must submit to authority in order for there to be a seizure?

[fleeing is not submission to authority. Evidence obtained during the chase doesn't constitute a seizure.]

What case gives us protective sweeps?

[Searching officer possesses a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene. --- Only cursory inspection of spaces where a person may be found & lasts no longer than is necessary to dispel reasonable suspicion of danger, i.e. no longer than it takes to complete the arrest and depart the premises.]

What case addresses sobriety checkpoints?

[Detention of more extensive testing may require more suspicion; balancing test between state inerest and motorist's expectation not to be intruded upon (weight in favor of state)

1. Balance state interest in preventing X (not general crime)

2. Effectiveness of achieving (just that has some effectiveness)

3. Level of intrusion into private interest.

What case gives us the rule that check points must have a primary purpose other than general crime deterrence?

[Primary/2nd purpose, Search for general criminality not allowed; must relate to highway safety; must still balance the state's interest and motorist's expectation not to be intruded upon (weight in favor of state)]

What case articulates the requirement of standing in asserting a 4th amendment right?

[Socially recognized (legitimate) expectation of privacy in area subject to search or seizure required to challenge legality of a 4th invasion.]

What case gives us the good faith exception to a bad warrant?

Elements: 1. In the absence of an allegation that the magistrate abandoned his detached and neutral role, suppression is appropriate only if

1a. The officers where dishonest or reckless in preparing their affadavit or could not have harbored an objectively reasonable belief in the existence of probable cause or,

1b. there is not sufficient info. in the warrant or,

1c. the warrant is deficient on its face.

What case gives us the inevitable discovery exception to the Fruit of the poisonous tree?

[preponderance of the evidence standard of review]

[Christian burial]

What case gives us the Independent source exception to the Fruit of the poisonous tree?

Even though police did enter without a warrant they did obtain a valid warrant without using any information obtained in the warrantless entry.

What case gives us the attenuation exception to the fruit of the poisonous tree?

Attenuation: Time + no custody = dissipation of Taint.

Wong Sun's statement is allowed in b/c he was not under arrest at the time he mad the statement and there was a time gap between release and statement. ---Statements can be excluded as well as physical evidence. --- "confession after illegal arrest excluded unless events break the causal connection" -- must be an act of free will sufficient to purge the primary taint.

What case gives us the rule that negligence by a police employee is not sufficient to invoke suppression?

(Mistake of Warrant)