How to Analyze Exceptions to the Search Warrant Requirement on a Criminal Procedure Essay

📚 LAW SCHOOL & BAR EXAM PREP
Law school prep: studicata.com/law-school
Bar exam prep: studicata.com/bar-exam
Free courses: studicata.com/free-courses
❤️ COMMUNITY & REVIEWS
Community: studicata.com/groups/community
Testimonials: studicata.com/testimonials-an...
Submit a review: shoutout.studicata.com
📱 TECH
iOS app: studicata.com/ios
Android app: studicata.com/android
📣 ABOUT
Studicata provides a fresher, more relatable way to prep for law school finals and the bar exam. With top-rated video lectures, exam walkthrough videos, outlines, study guides, strategy guides, essay practice exams, multiple-choice assessments, performance tracking, and more-Studicata has you covered with everything you need to ace your finals and pass the bar exam with confidence.
Email: info@studicata.com
Learn more: studicata.com
🎬 VIDEO INFO
How to Analyze Exceptions to the Search Warrant Requirement on a Criminal Procedure Essay
THE SEARCH WARRANT REQUIREMENT
Absent an exception, a government search that physically intrudes into an area where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy is unlawful UNLESS the government agent performing the search properly executes a valid search warrant.
You can think of the exceptions to the search warrant requirement as seven E.S.C.A.P.E.S. from the warrant requirement:
(E) Exigent circumstances
(S) Search incident to lawful arrest (SILA)
(C) Consent
(A) Automobiles
(P) Plain View
(E) Evidence obtained from administrative searches
(S) Stop and frisk
EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
Law enforcement officers may conduct a search without a warrant if: (1) the officers are in “hot pursuit” of a suspect; (2) the officers or public are in immediate danger; OR (3) the evidence would spoil or disappear in the time it would take to obtain a warrant.
However, a warrant is necessary for a search if the officers create the exigent circumstances.
SEARCH INCIDENT TO A LAWFUL ARREST (SILA)
Law enforcement officers may conduct a search for weapons or evidence without a warrant if the search occurs at the time that a lawful arrest is made. The scope of the search is generally limited to objects within the reach of the arrestee. If the arrest is made in a home, adjoining rooms may also be searched to ensure officer safety (i.e., other assailants that may be lying in wait).
CONSENT
Law enforcement officers may conduct a search without a warrant if a person voluntarily consents to a search. Officers do NOT have to inform the subject that she has the right to refuse consent to the search.
A third party with apparent authority can consent to search. However, officers cannot search over a present occupant’s objection (e.g., if one occupant consents and the other occupant refuses, officers cannot search the property).
AUTOMOBILES
Law enforcement officers may conduct a search without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe that an automobile contains contraband or evidence of a crime. They can search the parts of the vehicle, and containers inside, which could reasonably contain the items for which there is probable cause (e.g., cannot search for a shotgun in the glove box where it cannot reasonably fit).
PLAIN VIEW
Law enforcement officers may seize evidence without a warrant if: (1) the officers are legally on the premises; (2) the evidence is observed (with any of the five senses) in plain view; AND
(3) there is probable cause to believe the items are evidence of a crime or contraband.
ADMINISTRATIVE SEARCHES
Law enforcement officers do NOT need search warrants to conduct administrative searches if the search is both: (1) reasonable; AND (2) conducted pursuant to established police agency procedures that are designed to meet legitimate objectives while limiting the discretion of the officer. (e.g., airplane boarding areas, international borders, roadblocks for drunk drivers, etc.)
STOP AND FRISK (TERRY STOPS)
Law enforcement officers can stop an individual when the officer has a reasonable suspicion, based on articulable facts (i.e., more than a “hunch” - less than probable cause), to believe that the subject is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity.
During a Terry stop, an officer can frisk a suspect for WEAPONS without a warrant; however, the officer cannot initiate a search for EVIDENCE. If the frisk for weapons reveals objects whose shape makes their identity obvious (e.g., object is obviously contraband), the officer may seize those objects.
Learn more: studicata.com

Пікірлер: 55

  • @collequ
    @collequ5 жыл бұрын

    You are absolutely amazing ty I will be buying every bit of material you have available for July bar. I wish I found your site long ago. Anyone taking the bar will most certainly pass with your guidance.

  • @marcelal827
    @marcelal8272 жыл бұрын

    I have never loved a stranger as much as I love you right now!! It's 4AM and I am writting a legal analysis paper, and Thank God I ran into your account because my mind is becoming foggy from exhaustion. Thank you for making such great videos!!

  • @studicata

    @studicata

    2 жыл бұрын

    Thank you so much-I'm happy to help!

  • @tbrowntracyj

    @tbrowntracyj

    Жыл бұрын

    He is handsome smart yeah it's a lot of info to know

  • @user-ul7yn4eh5r
    @user-ul7yn4eh5r Жыл бұрын

    This is golden!!! You are very kind to share your knowledge. Thank you for all the videos you have put out there!

  • @sc541
    @sc5414 жыл бұрын

    Wow, you are AMAZING! Thanks for this! I can’t stop watching!

  • @jrashidi
    @jrashidi5 жыл бұрын

    Thank you so much! These videos are extremely helpful!

  • @studicata

    @studicata

    5 жыл бұрын

    No problem, happy to help!

  • @IndusPacificLawOffice
    @IndusPacificLawOffice3 жыл бұрын

    Hi, Hats off to you.. Please don't remove these videos ever. I am an attorney from Pakistan. these quick review courses are very great and helpful to refresh legal standards.

  • @shawannaanderson3226
    @shawannaanderson32264 жыл бұрын

    Thank you so much. ☺️

  • @studicata
    @studicata5 жыл бұрын

    🚨 SPECIAL OFFER: Want to crush law school finals, rack up scholarship $$$, pass the bar exam, and practice law like a BOSS? Take the LEAP. Get started today for free at: www.studicata.com/leap

  • @lia.is.on.
    @lia.is.on.5 жыл бұрын

    All I hear is Dory saying ES-CAP-AY! Thank you for this!!!

  • @studicata

    @studicata

    5 жыл бұрын

    LOL 😂. No problem, happy to help!

  • @davidsoto4394
    @davidsoto4394 Жыл бұрын

    Excellent video.

  • @studicata

    @studicata

    Жыл бұрын

    Thank you!

  • @KGCSHS96
    @KGCSHS964 жыл бұрын

    Whats the difference between SILA and a protective sweep?

  • @rechase84
    @rechase843 жыл бұрын

    Quick, friendly question - US v Santana (Partially upheld by Lange v CA) allowed for warrantless entry into a home during hot-pursuit of *some* misdemeanor crimes. Would a peace officer then be covered by plain view doctrine and protective sweeps if contraband or proof of the original crime is found in the home?

  • @jonathanrashtian9884
    @jonathanrashtian98842 жыл бұрын

    Does SILA for a vehicular arrest include the trunk at any point (before arrested and put in back of squad car or after)?

  • @celebrityinterviews3691
    @celebrityinterviews36913 жыл бұрын

    excellent

  • @ZantherStone
    @ZantherStone2 жыл бұрын

    Did the end up putting up that link with the list of administrative search reasons? (I saw in the caption text he put some examples, but I think he mentioned a specific link with a bigger list)

  • @SirShoddrick
    @SirShoddrick3 жыл бұрын

    What is a “ stale warrant “?

  • @bryonwatkins1432
    @bryonwatkins14325 жыл бұрын

    ALSO, like i caught. The ACTUAL cop, Federal Agent, etc., CANNOT issue the warrant, sign the warrant themselves, and NOT file it. That’s fraud. ALSO, i believe it has to have the court seal on it so that it’s LAWFULLY authenticated. Lastly, i believe it has to be filed with the Secretary of State.

  • @legalresearchenforcementin4157
    @legalresearchenforcementin41574 жыл бұрын

    All the best

  • @tangobelair
    @tangobelair5 жыл бұрын

    SILA is a little tricky , if the person is unrestrained then the gov't may search the interior of the car for anything as long as if its w/in arms reach , they can look for biddles of cocaine even if he was pulled over for DUI , h/e once the suspect is in the police car they can still search the automobile h/e can only search for evidence consistant w/ the DUI , is that right? In Arizona v. Gant (556 U.S. 332 (2009)), the U.S. Supreme Court redefined and narrowed the traditional “search incident to arrest” exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. The Court held that officers may search a vehicle incident to an arrest only if the arrestee is unrestrained and “within reaching distance of the passenger compartment” at the time of the search or “it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence” of the crime for which the person is being arrested. Because Stegall was handcuffed and secured in a patrol car at the time of the search, the officers needed a basis to believe the vehicle contained evidence linking Stegall to the road rage incident-otherwise the search would not trigger the search incident to arrest exception. The witness told officers that she saw Stegall put something in the rear hatch of the SUV. Stegall admitted that he was the driver involved in the road rage incident and said that he probably had a gun in the SUV. Plus, the other driver identified Stegall as the one who brandished a gun. Therefore, the court held that there was reason to believe that the SUV contained evidence of the crime of terroristic threatening.

  • @URMedicare

    @URMedicare

    4 жыл бұрын

    You are correct but this is a general overview for the Bar ;)

  • @tangobelair

    @tangobelair

    4 жыл бұрын

    @@URMedicare and I get that it's a general overview for the bar but I think it's essential that the law as it relates to A search incident to a lawful arrest has changed and what was permissible under your general overview may not be permissible under the constitution that said I think you're terrific, your lectures are greatly appreciated the intent was not to disagree rather to point out that the law has subtly changed. it appears to be a 2 part analysis either of the 2 permit the search of the car "only if the arrestee is unrestrained and “within reaching distance of the passenger compartment” at the time of the search or “it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence” of the crime for which the person is being arrested. I think it's just a little bit more nuanced than what it used to be.

  • @tbrowntracyj
    @tbrowntracyj Жыл бұрын

    So if a police officer does not have probable cause how does he get a warrant

  • @MisterMikeTexas
    @MisterMikeTexas3 жыл бұрын

    If 4A is violated, that's where 2A comes in.

  • @chrisparker740
    @chrisparker7403 жыл бұрын

    You forgot the "I" for Inventory Exception. Maybe "ESCAPIES"

  • @ZantherStone

    @ZantherStone

    2 жыл бұрын

    I thought about that too! I figured it might fit into the administrative exception? But that's such a common one as far as criminal procedure that I think it deserves mention

  • @kala3019
    @kala30195 жыл бұрын

    Is he saying are are arnt going to be able to search lawfully at 17:46?

  • @marksman9249

    @marksman9249

    3 жыл бұрын

    Yes . 2 co occupants 1 consents other don’t . Then can’t search common areas.

  • @marksman9249
    @marksman92493 жыл бұрын

    Motor car exception.. The motor car must be readily mobile. Does not apply to motor homes.

  • @malibutonymalibutony
    @malibutonymalibutony5 жыл бұрын

    After a search warrant was issued and executed however nothing was taken one of my conditions 4 released from the jail until my court date in April states that I am to have no weapons I voluntarily surrender what I would think of as a potential weapon before researching the official definition of weapon in the state of New Jersey and close to nothing that was seized was on that list of weapons description. When I allowed the local PD to come back into my home to take items from in my bedroom I caught a rookie officer in the other room on a surveillance camera going into a bag of mine that was not included and the reason that they were there my question is was this an unlawful search into that particular bag? Personally I think he was planting something in that bag looked up and saw my video camera realize he was caught and then went back in to retrieve it again nonetheless he should not have even been in that room to begin with as all my items that I was voluntarily giving up we're in my bedroom

  • @justinbrannan6174
    @justinbrannan61743 жыл бұрын

    So recently, I had Drug Mart call the cops cause I was sleeping in my car in their parking lot. The cops woke me up asked to search my car which I said no then made me leave Drug still half asleep. Not even a mile up the road I fell asleep at the wheel and rear ended the guy in front of me. The cops were called to make a report and as soon as the officer got there he walks up to my car and asks to search it. I tell him no so he gets the k9 to take around my car. Supposedly the k9 hinted on the passenger side of my car and while searching my car finds a meth pipe I've never seen before. I'm then arrested and put into the back seat of the cruiser. My friend oommate was already there and the officer who arrested me ask her and I if she can drive my car home. We both say yes. While I'm in the back of the cruiser another officer who knows who I am cones over to the cruiser and says he has a tow truck on the way. My friend and I both explain to him that she has a license and can drive my car home. He says no, he's already got a tow truck on the way. Then he says plus I I remember you writing a complaint on me last year. He walks over to my car and continues to search my car. He pops the trunk without my permission and searches the trunk where he finds a locked box. He then takes my keys out of my ignition and tried all my keys until he finds the correct one. Was this legal and if not, what should I do?

  • @zachmargules2189
    @zachmargules21895 жыл бұрын

    This guy is the Bar Exam Savior Jesus Christ

  • @studicata

    @studicata

    5 жыл бұрын

    Haha, thank you! 🙏

  • @collequ

    @collequ

    5 жыл бұрын

    Zach Margules oh yes he is are you sitting for Feb?

  • @christyschaar957

    @christyschaar957

    9 ай бұрын

    JESUS CHRIST IS THE ONLY LORD WHO SHARES HIS GLORY WITH NO ONE. THANKS TO JESUS THEN TO OUR BRETHREN . GOD GETS THE GLORY . BLESSED BE THE LORD AND HIS HOLY NAME . WOE TO BLASPHEMERS!!!

  • @94imabitch
    @94imabitch5 жыл бұрын

    you never put the administrative searches below!

  • @studicata

    @studicata

    5 жыл бұрын

    You're right! I completely forgot to add the descriptions to the criminal procedure videos. 🤦‍♂️ I am out of town right now, but I will get on it as soon as I get back.

  • @94imabitch

    @94imabitch

    5 жыл бұрын

    Studicata my final is tomorrow!! Don’t worry. Love your videos!!!!! They are so helpful!

  • @therichestyoutubechannel6754
    @therichestyoutubechannel67545 ай бұрын

    😂😂

  • @kristennicole4356
    @kristennicole43563 жыл бұрын

    Could you do a video on the case with Breonna Taylor?

  • @alm.1820

    @alm.1820

    3 жыл бұрын

    They got a search warrant, they didn’t need an exception

  • @javidmurray1807
    @javidmurray1807 Жыл бұрын

    Love these videos… so many ads…. Sigh

  • @Jesse.Glanville
    @Jesse.Glanville4 жыл бұрын

    FYI a "terry stop" is an arrest. Any detainment is an arrest. Arrest requires in most states a LAWFUL WARRANT or seeing a FELONY occuring. NO TRAFFIC VIOLATION IS EVER VALID FOR A TERRY STOP. Also, "drug" offenses or any statute offenses called "crimes" are UNLAWFUL. NO INJURED PARTY. Proving the courts do not Honor the Constitution requiring an Injured Party. NONE OF ANYTHING USING "LEGAL" IS LAWFUL. Legal is the opposite of Lawful. POLICE OFFICERS ARE NOT LAW. Only the ELECTED SHERRIF is law. They are POLICY ENFORCERS. Enforcing Private Corporate Legal Statutes.

  • @Jesse.Glanville
    @Jesse.Glanville4 жыл бұрын

    Dont Trust someone with A LAW LICENSE. Such a License does not exist. Only a 'Temple of Baal BAR Card". BRITISH ACCREDITED REGISTRY. British Agents who's first duty in their by-laws is to the COURTS.

Келесі