350 final exam
Reasonable expectation of privacy test - ANS-- 4th amend. is triggered when an officer
intrudes a place or item that is considered to be private
- test: subjective and objective expectation of privacy
Katz v. U.S: Facts - ANS-- Officers wiretapped convo. in a phone booth that Katz was in
- the door was closed behind him
- convicted for wagering bets over the phone
Katz: procedural - ANS-- the court of appeals ruled evidence was admissible because
there wasn't physical intrusion
Katz: U.S supreme holding - ANS-- Ruled that the evidence was inadmissible because
1. expanded 4th amend to wiretappng and expectation of privacy approach
2. objectively everyone would agree that Katz wanted privacy because he closed the
door behind him
CA v Greenwood: Facts - ANS-- Greenwood left trash inside an opaque trash bag on
the street where incriminating evidence of drugs were located
- Police found drugs & convicted him
approach for Greenwood - ANS-expectation of privacy
Greenwood Holding U.S. Supreme Court - ANS-- Evidence was admissible
- There was no expectation of privacy placed on a street curb/curbside. Anyone could
got through the trash bag bc it was out in the public
Kyllo v. U.S. Facts - ANS-- Man was convicted for growing marijuana in home due to
police using a thermal imaging device
Kyllo procedural - ANS-- The 9th circuit court said there was no physical violation
,Kyllo Holding SC - ANS-- Said that evidence was inadmissible bc it violated his 4th
amend. rights
- Home has the highest expectation of privacy
- Thermal imaging is an uncommon device & it gave info about what was going on in the
home
Question: What approach was Kyllo under - ANS-- Expectation of privacy
Property rights approach - ANS-- When there is physical intrusion on a place or item
Fl. v. Jardines Facts - ANS-- A k-9 dog went to the front porch & smelled marijuana
-The police got a sr wr & went back to home & seized marijuana
Jardines holding SC - ANS-- Stated that the evidence was inadmissible
-The curtilage is the area immediately surrounding the home is treated as a home under
the property rights approach
-Using a k-9 to find drugs w/o a sr wr violated the 4th amend. bc the dog was searching
for incriminating evidence
General Rule (Terry Case) - ANS-- Facts supporting pc is required for gov't intrusion on
liberty and privacy
- wr preferred
Exception to the general rule - ANS-- stop & frisk
Stop & Frisk - ANS-- neither pc or wr is required to stop & frisk, only need ARS of a
criminal activity
Objective standard to determine if someone was stopped - ANS-- a reasonable person
would have believed that she was not free to leave or decline the officer's request
- Ex: officers surrounding person, display of weapons, restrains
Terry v. Ohio Facts - ANS-- Terry & his 2 friends were acting suspicious, McFadden stop
& frisked them & found weapons on them
, Terry Holding SC - ANS-- Revolver was found admissible bc officer had ARS
Law on Stops - ANS-- A stop is a seizure, so it must satisfy the legal threshold of ARS
- Can stop & detain for questioning upon ARS that a person is connected with criminal
activity. Must have specific article facts
Law on Frisk - ANS-- Frisks are searchers within the 4th amend.
- Can frisk someone on a lawful stop
- Can pat down on outer clothing
- Can't go into pockets
- If an officer feel something but does not know what it is they can't go into the pockets
- Reasons for frisks is for officer's safety
- Can frisk a person upon ARS that person may be armed
How officers prove they have ARS (objective standard base on totality of circumstance)
- ANS-- Officer's observation, knowledge, experience & training
- Info. from informants or other officer
Unacceptable basis for ARS - ANS-- Hunches, gut feeling, officer's subjective good faith
alone
- Facts lacking, reliability, credibility
Probable cause - ANS-- must have PC to search, seize, and arrest
- without PC it will violate 4th amend
- inadmissible
PC to search - ANS-- fair probability that a crime has been or will be committed and fair
probability that evidence of crime is located at the place to be searched
dual prong test or 2 prong test - ANS-Prong 1: informants basis of knowledge
- facts supporting a good basis
- how they know what they know
Reasonable expectation of privacy test - ANS-- 4th amend. is triggered when an officer
intrudes a place or item that is considered to be private
- test: subjective and objective expectation of privacy
Katz v. U.S: Facts - ANS-- Officers wiretapped convo. in a phone booth that Katz was in
- the door was closed behind him
- convicted for wagering bets over the phone
Katz: procedural - ANS-- the court of appeals ruled evidence was admissible because
there wasn't physical intrusion
Katz: U.S supreme holding - ANS-- Ruled that the evidence was inadmissible because
1. expanded 4th amend to wiretappng and expectation of privacy approach
2. objectively everyone would agree that Katz wanted privacy because he closed the
door behind him
CA v Greenwood: Facts - ANS-- Greenwood left trash inside an opaque trash bag on
the street where incriminating evidence of drugs were located
- Police found drugs & convicted him
approach for Greenwood - ANS-expectation of privacy
Greenwood Holding U.S. Supreme Court - ANS-- Evidence was admissible
- There was no expectation of privacy placed on a street curb/curbside. Anyone could
got through the trash bag bc it was out in the public
Kyllo v. U.S. Facts - ANS-- Man was convicted for growing marijuana in home due to
police using a thermal imaging device
Kyllo procedural - ANS-- The 9th circuit court said there was no physical violation
,Kyllo Holding SC - ANS-- Said that evidence was inadmissible bc it violated his 4th
amend. rights
- Home has the highest expectation of privacy
- Thermal imaging is an uncommon device & it gave info about what was going on in the
home
Question: What approach was Kyllo under - ANS-- Expectation of privacy
Property rights approach - ANS-- When there is physical intrusion on a place or item
Fl. v. Jardines Facts - ANS-- A k-9 dog went to the front porch & smelled marijuana
-The police got a sr wr & went back to home & seized marijuana
Jardines holding SC - ANS-- Stated that the evidence was inadmissible
-The curtilage is the area immediately surrounding the home is treated as a home under
the property rights approach
-Using a k-9 to find drugs w/o a sr wr violated the 4th amend. bc the dog was searching
for incriminating evidence
General Rule (Terry Case) - ANS-- Facts supporting pc is required for gov't intrusion on
liberty and privacy
- wr preferred
Exception to the general rule - ANS-- stop & frisk
Stop & Frisk - ANS-- neither pc or wr is required to stop & frisk, only need ARS of a
criminal activity
Objective standard to determine if someone was stopped - ANS-- a reasonable person
would have believed that she was not free to leave or decline the officer's request
- Ex: officers surrounding person, display of weapons, restrains
Terry v. Ohio Facts - ANS-- Terry & his 2 friends were acting suspicious, McFadden stop
& frisked them & found weapons on them
, Terry Holding SC - ANS-- Revolver was found admissible bc officer had ARS
Law on Stops - ANS-- A stop is a seizure, so it must satisfy the legal threshold of ARS
- Can stop & detain for questioning upon ARS that a person is connected with criminal
activity. Must have specific article facts
Law on Frisk - ANS-- Frisks are searchers within the 4th amend.
- Can frisk someone on a lawful stop
- Can pat down on outer clothing
- Can't go into pockets
- If an officer feel something but does not know what it is they can't go into the pockets
- Reasons for frisks is for officer's safety
- Can frisk a person upon ARS that person may be armed
How officers prove they have ARS (objective standard base on totality of circumstance)
- ANS-- Officer's observation, knowledge, experience & training
- Info. from informants or other officer
Unacceptable basis for ARS - ANS-- Hunches, gut feeling, officer's subjective good faith
alone
- Facts lacking, reliability, credibility
Probable cause - ANS-- must have PC to search, seize, and arrest
- without PC it will violate 4th amend
- inadmissible
PC to search - ANS-- fair probability that a crime has been or will be committed and fair
probability that evidence of crime is located at the place to be searched
dual prong test or 2 prong test - ANS-Prong 1: informants basis of knowledge
- facts supporting a good basis
- how they know what they know
