United States v. Patane
Brief

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 ...

Schmerber v. California
Brief

CitationSchmerber v. Cal., 384 U.S. 757, 86 S. Ct. 1826, 16 L. Ed. 2d 908, 1966 U.S. LEXIS 1129 (U.S. June 20, 1966) Brief Fact Summary. DUI suspect had a blood sample taken. Analysis was used against him. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination “protects an accused only from being compelled to testify against himself, or otherwise provide the State with evidence of a testimonial or communicative nature, and that the withdrawal of blood and use of . . . analysis . . . did not involve compulsion.” ...

Doyle v. Ohio
Brief

CitationDoyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 96 S. Ct. 2240, 49 L. Ed. 2d 91, 1976 U.S. LEXIS 66 (U.S. June 17, 1976) Brief Fact Summary. Two individuals were convicted of selling marijuana. During cross examination, the prosecutor asked why they did not tell the police the post-Miranda exculpatory story that they told during trial. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[T]he use for impeachment purposes of petitioners’ silence, at the time of arrest and after receiving Miranda warnings, violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” ...

Oregon v. Elstad
Brief

CitationOregon v. Elstad, 1984 U.S. LEXIS 1317, 465 U.S. 1078, 104 S. Ct. 1437, 79 L. Ed. 2d 759, 52 U.S.L.W. 3650 (U.S. Mar. 5, 1984) Brief Fact Summary. An individual was convicted of burglary. A signed confession was used to convict him. He was questioned without the benefit of Miranda warnings. Synopsis of Rule of Law. “[A] suspect who has once responded to unwarned yet uncoercive questioning is not thereby disabled from waiving his rights and confessing after he has been given the requisite Miranda warnings.” ...

Illinois v. Perkins
Brief

CitationIll. v. Perkins, 496 U.S. 292, 110 S. Ct. 2394, 110 L. Ed. 2d 243, 1990 U.S. LEXIS 2885, 58 U.S.L.W. 4737 (U.S. June 4, 1990) Brief Fact Summary. An undercover police agent was placed in jail with the suspect and got them to elicit incriminating statements. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Miranda warnings are not required when an undercover agent asks questions that could result in incriminating statements. ...

Missouri v. Seibert
Brief

CitationMissouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600, 124 S. Ct. 2601, 159 L. Ed. 2d 643, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 4578, 72 U.S.L.W. 4634, 17 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 851, 2004 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 476 (U.S. June 28, 2004) Brief Fact Summary. Respondent, Seibert, brought appeal after she was convicted of second-degree murder based on a confession that was elicited after she had made an un-Mirandized confession. Synopsis of Rule of Law. In order to use a post-Mirandized confession, after eliciting an un-Mirandized confession, the police must give the defendant ample opportunity to consider the effect of the Miranda warni ...

Miranda v. Arizona
Brief

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. ...

Escobedo v. Illinois
Brief

CitationEscobedo v. Ill., 378 U.S. 478, 84 S. Ct. 1758, 12 L. Ed. 2d 977, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 827, 4 Ohio Misc. 197, 32 Ohio Op. 2d 31 (U.S. June 22, 1964) Brief Fact Summary. The petitioner Danny Escobedo asked to speak with his lawyer while in police custody but before being formally charged and was denied. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Not allowing someone to speak with an attorney, and not advising them of their right to remain silent after they have been arrested and before they have been interrogated is a denial of assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment. ...

Brewer v. Williams
Brief

CitationBrewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387, 97 S. Ct. 1232, 51 L. Ed. 2d 424, 1977 U.S. LEXIS 64 (U.S. Mar. 23, 1977) Brief Fact Summary. The defendant, Robert Williams (the “defendant”), after being arraigned on charges of abducting a 10-year old girl, was traveling with an officer between Davenport and Des Moines, Iowa. Although the defendant’s lawyers instructed that no questioning should take place outside their presence, the defendant was convinced by the officer to give directions to the body of the girl. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Once judicial proceedings begin, the ...

Spano v. New York
Brief

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
Brief

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 ...

Massiah v. United States
Brief

CitationMassiah v. United States, 377 U.S. 201, 84 S. Ct. 1199, 12 L. Ed. 2d 246, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1277 (U.S. May 18, 1964) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner was recorded by a co-conspirator with the aid of the authorities. Evidence was exculpatory. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Suspect is “denied the basic protections of the [Sixth Amendment] guarantee when there was used against him at his trial evidence of his own incriminating words, which federal agents had deliberately elicited from him after he had been indicted and in the absence of his counsel.” ...

Brown v. Mississippi
Brief

CitationBrown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 56 S. Ct. 461, 80 L. Ed. 682, 1936 U.S. LEXIS 527 (U.S. Feb. 17, 1936) Brief Fact Summary. Two individuals were convicted of murder, the only evidence of which was their own confessions that were procured after violent interrogation. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause is violated when a confession obtained via physical torture is used to convict a defendant. ...

Strickland v. Washington
Brief

CitationStrickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 1984 U.S. LEXIS 79, 52 U.S.L.W. 4565 (U.S. May 14, 1984) Brief Fact Summary. After being sentenced to death, Petitioner filed for a writ of Habeas Corpus on the grounds that he was given ineffective assistance of counsel. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Error alone is not sufficient to prove that a defendant was deprived of their constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel. ...

Nix v. Williams (Williams II)
Brief

CitationNix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 104 S. Ct. 2501, 81 L. Ed. 2d 377, 1984 U.S. LEXIS 101, 52 U.S.L.W. 4732 (U.S. June 11, 1984) Brief Fact Summary. Williams was arrested for the murder of a 10 year old girl whose body he disposed of along a gravel road. State law enforcement officials engaged in a search for the child’s body. During the search, in response to an officer’s appeal for assistance, Williams made statements to the police (without an attorney present) which helped lead them to the body. Williams was only read his Miranda rights after he was arrested. Synopsis o ...

Kyllo v. United States
Brief

CitationKyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 121 S. Ct. 2038, 150 L. Ed. 2d 94, 2001 U.S. LEXIS 4487, 69 U.S.L.W. 4431, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4749, 2001 Daily Journal DAR 5879, 2001 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2926, 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 329 (U.S. June 11, 2001) Brief Fact Summary. The police obtained evidence of a marijuana growing operation inside the defendant, Kyllo’s (the “defendant”) home, by using a thermal imaging device from outside the home. The police used the device to gather evidence to support issuance of a search warrant for the home. Synopsis of Rule of Law. ...

Hoffa v. United States
Brief

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 ...

Katz v. United States
Brief

CitationKatz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 88 S. Ct. 507, 19 L. Ed. 2d 576, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 2 (U.S. Dec. 18, 1967) Synopsis of Rule of Law. The protection of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution (“Constitution”), against unreasonable searches and seizures, follows the person and not the place. ...

United States v. Dionisio
Brief

Citation410 U.S. 1, 93 S. Ct. 764, 35 L. Ed. 2d 67 (1973) Brief Fact Summary. A number of people asked to provide voice exemplars in connection with a grand jury investigation moved to quash the subpoenas on the grounds that it would violate their Fourth and Fifth Amendment constitutional rights. Synopsis of Rule of Law. A subpoena to produce a voice exemplar before a grand jury does not violate a person’s Fourth or Fifth Amendment constitutional rights. ...

Olmstead v. United States
Brief

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
Brief

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
Brief

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.” ...

City of Indianapolis v. Edmond
Brief

Citation531 U.S. 32, 121 S. Ct. 447, 148 L. Ed. 2d 333 (2000) Brief Fact Summary. Indianapolis set up a series of checkpoints to intercept drugs. Two motorists sued. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Police must have the “usual requirement of individualized suspicion where [they] seek to employ a checkpoint primarily for the ordinary enterprise of investigating crimes.” ...

Hayes v. Florida
Brief

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
Brief

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. ...