CitationWinston v. Lee, 470 U.S. 753, 105 S. Ct. 1611, 84 L. Ed. 2d 662, 1985 U.S. LEXIS 76, 53 U.S.L.W. 4367 (U.S. Mar. 20, 1985) Brief Fact Summary. A robbery suspect armed with a gun was shot by a storeowner when he attempted to rob his store. The bullet was lodged in the suspect’s chest, and the Commonwealth wanted a doctor to surgically remove the bullet. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[T]he Commonwealth has failed to demonstrate that it would be “reasonable” under the terms of the Fourth Amendment to search for evidence of this crime by means of the contemplated s ...
Search Results
United States v. Patane
CitationUnited States v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630, 124 S. Ct. 2620, 159 L. Ed. 2d 667, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 4577, 72 U.S.L.W. 4643, 2004 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 482 (U.S. June 28, 2004) Brief Fact Summary. Patane appealed firearm charges when a gun was found as the result of his un-Mirandized statements to police. Issue. Whether evidence found as the result of an un-Mirandized confession is admissible. Held. Remanded. The court held such evidence is admissible, so long as the statements have not been coerced; however, the statements, themselves, may not be admissible as un-Mirandized confessions. Di ...
Harris v. United States
CitationHarris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545, 122 S. Ct. 2406, 153 L. Ed. 2d 524, 2002 U.S. LEXIS 4652, 70 U.S.L.W. 4655, 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5585, 2002 Daily Journal DAR 7035, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 473 (U.S. June 24, 2002) Brief Fact Summary. Gun and narcotics dealer was given a higher sentence for brandishing a gun. Synopsis of Rule of Law. McMillan is “limit[ed] . . . to cases that do not involve the imposition of a sentence more severe than the statutory maximum for the offense established by the jury’s verdict.” ...
Moran v. Burbine
CitationMoran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412, 106 S. Ct. 1135, 89 L. Ed. 2d 410, 1986 U.S. LEXIS 32, 54 U.S.L.W. 4265 (U.S. Mar. 10, 1986) Brief Fact Summary. The police detained the respondent, Brian Burbine (the “respondent”), and the respondent waived his right to counsel. The respondent, unaware that his sister obtained counsel for him, confessed to the crime. His counsel was told by police that they were not questioning him when they actually were acquiring his confession. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Fifth Amendment constitutional rights embodied by Miranda do not require police ...
Miranda v. Arizona
CitationMiranda v. Ariz., 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694, 1966 U.S. LEXIS 2817, 10 Ohio Misc. 9, 36 Ohio Op. 2d 237, 10 A.L.R.3d 974 (U.S. June 13, 1966) Brief Fact Summary. The defendants offered incriminating evidence during police interrogations without prior notification of their rights under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution (the “Constitution”). Synopsis of Rule of Law. Government authorities need to inform individuals of their Fifth Amendment constitutional rights prior to an interrogation following an arrest. ...
Kuhlmann v. Wilson
CitationKuhlmann v. Wilson, 477 U.S. 436, 106 S. Ct. 2616, 91 L. Ed. 2d 364, 1986 U.S. LEXIS 65, 54 U.S.L.W. 4809 (U.S. June 26, 1986) Brief Fact Summary. An informer planted in a suspect’s jail cell obtained incriminating information from a suspect after being told not to start the conversation, but to listen for incriminating information. Synopsis of Rule of Law. When police plant an informer with a jailed suspect and the informer does not ask questions, the suspect’s statements to the informer are admissible unless the informer took coercive steps other than listening to eli ...
Spano v. New York
CitationSPANO v. NEW YORK, 360 U.S. 315, 79 S. Ct. 1202, 3 L. Ed. 2d 1265, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 751 (U.S. June 22, 1959) Brief Fact Summary. An individual was accused of murdering another individual after the victim took his money from a bar. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[The] petitioner’s will was overborne by official pressure, fatigue and sympathy falsely aroused, after considering all the facts in their post-indictment setting.” ...
Colorado v. Connelly
CitationColorado v. Connelly, 474 U.S. 1050, 106 S. Ct. 785, 88 L. Ed. 2d 763, 1986 U.S. LEXIS 2291, 54 U.S.L.W. 3457 (U.S. Jan. 13, 1986) Brief Fact Summary. An individual with a history of mental illness approached a police officer and confessed to a murder. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[C]oercive police activity is a necessary predicate to the finding that a confession is not ‘voluntary’ within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. [A]lso [ ] that the taking of respondent’s statements, and their admission into evidence, constitute no vi ...
Ross v. Moffit
CitationRoss v. Moffitt, 417 U.S. 600, 94 S. Ct. 2437, 41 L. Ed. 2d 341, 1974 U.S. LEXIS 76 (U.S. June 17, 1974) Brief Fact Summary. This was a consolidated appeal of two separate cases in which indigent defendants were convicted in North Carolina trial courts. Both appealed and were represented by court appointed counsel before the North Carolina Court of Appeals. Each defendant thereafter pursued other discretionary post conviction remedies and were denied court appointed counsel. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The same concepts of fairness and equality, which require counsel in a first appe ...
Douglas, et al. v. California
CitationDouglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S. Ct. 814, 9 L. Ed. 2d 811, 1963 U.S. LEXIS 1943 (U.S. Mar. 18, 1963) Brief Fact Summary. Co-petitioners, Meyes and Douglas (the “petitioners”), were jointly represented by a public defender. They were tried and convicted of thirteen felonies in California. The petitioners appealed to the California District Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court. The United State Supreme Court (“Supreme Court”) granted certiorari. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Indigent petitioners are entitled to assistance of counsel in a fi ...
United States v. White
CitationUnited States v. White, 401 U.S. 745, 91 S. Ct. 1122, 28 L. Ed. 2d 453, 1971 U.S. LEXIS 132 (U.S. Apr. 5, 1971) Brief Fact Summary. Government authorities, through the use of an informant, secretly recorded conversations with the Respondent, James A. White (the “Respondent”). The informant was not present during the trial, but the recorded conversations were admitted. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The secret simultaneous (electronic) recording of conversations between an individual and government agents, without a warrant, does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United ...
Hoffa v. United States
CitationHoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293, 87 S. Ct. 408, 17 L. Ed. 2d 374, 1966 U.S. LEXIS 2778 (U.S. Dec. 12, 1966) Brief Fact Summary. A government informant was in a hotel room with a criminal defendant during a trial. The defendant often conferred with his attorneys in the room. The informant was there in order to obtain information from the defendant to be used during a second trial for witness tampering. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The conduct “by the Government by means of deceptively placing a secret informer in the quarters and councils of a defendant during one criminal ...
Olmstead v. United States
CitationOlmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 48 S. Ct. 564, 72 L. Ed. 944, 1928 U.S. LEXIS 694, 66 A.L.R. 376 (U.S. June 4, 1928) Brief Fact Summary. The conversations of various individuals involved in illegal liquor sales were tapped. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “A standard which would forbid the reception of evidence, if obtained by other than nice ethical conduct by government officials, would make society suffer and give criminals greater immunity than has been known heretofore. In the absence of controlling legislation by Congress, those who realize the difficulties in bringin ...
Dunaway v. New York
Citation442 U.S. 200, 99 S. Ct. 2248, 60 L. Ed. 2d 824 (1979) Brief Fact Summary. An individual was taken into police custody, but was told he was not under arrest. However, if he tried to leave, the police would have restrained him. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “Rochester police violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments when, without probable cause, they seized petitioner and transported him to the police station for interrogation.” ...
New York v. Harris
Citation495 U.S. 14, 110 S. Ct. 1640, 109 L. Ed. 2d 13 (1990) Brief Fact Summary. The police arrested an individual in his home without a warrant and he made various incriminating statements. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[W]here the police have probable cause to arrest a suspect, the exclusionary rule does not bar the State’s use of a statement made by the defendant outside of his home, even though the statement is taken after an arrest made in the home in violation of Payton.” ...
Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz
Citation496 U.S. 444, 110 S. Ct. 2481, 110 L. Ed. 2d 412 (1990) Brief Fact Summary. The constitutionality of a sobriety check point was at issue. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The checkpoint program is consistent with the Fourth Amendment because “the balance of the State’s interest in preventing drunken driving, the extent to which this system can reasonably be said to advance that interest, and the degree of intrusion upon individual motorists who are briefly stopped, weighs in favor of the state program.” ...
Hayes v. Florida
Citation470 U.S. 811, 105 S. Ct. 1643, 84 L. Ed. 2d 705 (1985) Brief Fact Summary. The police brought a suspect to the station and took his fingerprints without having probable cause until after his fingerprints were taken. Synopsis of Rule of Law. An individual cannot be brought to a police station and fingerprinted without probable cause and a warrant. ...
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada
Citation542 U.S. 960 Brief Fact Summary. After learning that an assault was committed, a police officer asked an individual to provide his name, but the individual refused. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Neither the Fourth or Fifth Amendment is violated when an individual can be arrested for not providing their name to an officer after the officer asks for it. ...
Minnesota v. Dickerson
Citation508 U.S. 366, 113 S. Ct. 2130, 124 L. Ed. 2d 334 (1993) Brief Fact Summary. A police officer patted down a suspect and discovered a small amount of crack cocaine in his jacket. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “If a police officer lawfully pats down a suspect’s outer clothing and feels an object whose contour or mass makes its identity immediately apparent, there has been no invasion of the suspect’s privacy beyond that already authorized by the officer’s search for weapons; if the object is contraband, its warrantless seizure would be justified by the same practic ...
United States v. Sharpe
Citation470 U.S. 675, 105 S. Ct. 1568, 84 L. Ed. 2d 605 (1985) Brief Fact Summary. Three individuals were arrested after a car and a truck were pulled over on the highway. A substantial amount of marijuana was found in the truck. The arrests did not take occur until thirty or forty minutes after the cars were pulled over. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “Much as a ‘bright line’ rule would be desirable, in evaluating whether an investigative detention is unreasonable, common sense and ordinary human experience must govern over rigid criteria.” ...
Illinois v. Wardlow
Citation528 U.S. 119, 120 S. Ct. 673, 145 L. Ed. 2d 570 (2000) Brief Fact Summary. An individual was arrested after fleeing from police officers in a known narcotics trafficking area. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The arresting officer “was justified in suspecting that [the suspect] was involved in criminal activity, and, therefore in investigating further.” ...
Wong Sun v. United States
Citation371 U.S. 471, 83 S. Ct. 407, 9 L. Ed. 2d 441 (1963) Brief Fact Summary. The constitutionality of various statements made by suspected drug dealers was at issue. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[V]erbal evidence which derives so immediately from an unlawful entry and an unauthorized arrest as the officers’ action in the present case is no less the ‘fruit’ of official illegality than the more common tangible fruits of the unwarranted intrusion.” ...
Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives’ Association
Citation489 U.S. 602, 109 S. Ct. 1402, 103 L. Ed. 2d 639, 13 OSHC 2065, 130 LRRM 2857, 4 IER Cases 224 (1989) Brief Fact Summary. Alcohol and drug use on the American Railroads caused officials to promulgate various regulations. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[A] warrant is [not] essential to render the intrusions here at issue reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” “[T]the alcohol and drug tests contemplated by Subparts C and D of the [Federal Railroad Administration’s] regulations are reasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.” ...
Camara v. Municipal Court of the City and County of San Francisco
Citation387 U.S. 523, 87 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed. 2d 930 (1967) Brief Fact Summary. An inspector from the Department of Health entered a home to investigate possible violations of a City’s housing code without a warrant. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[A]dministrative searches of the kind at issue here are significant intrusions upon the interests protected by the Fourth Amendment, that such searches when authorized and conducted without a warrant procedure lack the traditional safeguards which the Fourth Amendment guarantees to the individual, and that the reasons put forth in [Frank ...
New Jersey v. TLO
Citation469 U.S. 325, 105 S. Ct. 733, 83 L. Ed. 2d 720 (1985) Brief Fact Summary. The vice-principal of a school searched a students bag and found evidence that she was dealing marijuana. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[S]chool officials need not obtain a warrant before searching a student who is under their authority.” ...