This lecture provides an overview of criminal procedure law, with a significant focus on the constitutional foundations and the specifics of the Fourth Amendment. It explores the sources of this law, including the Constitution, statutes, federal rules, and state law. The text then examines the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, discussing its purpose, the concept of a reasonable expectation of privacy, the definitions of search and seizure, and the warrant requirement with its core components like probable cause and particularity. Finally, it details numerous exceptions to the warrant requirement and the impact of the exclusionary rule and related doctrines.

Key Takeaways

The primary sources include the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes enacted by Congress, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, state constitutions, state legislative enactments, and judicial decisions interpreting these provisions.

The fundamental purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to protect individual privacy and dignity against arbitrary government intrusion and to channel law enforcement activity through neutral decision making.

The two-part test asks whether the individual demonstrated an actual, subjective expectation of privacy, and whether that expectation is one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.

A seizure of property occurs when there is some meaningful interference with an individual’s possessory interest in property, considering factors like the officers' intention, the manner of taking custody, and the control exerted over the property.

A valid search warrant requires a neutral and detached magistrate to find probable cause to believe that evidence or contraband will be found at a specified location and that the warrant particularly describes the place to be searched and items to be seized.

The totality of the circumstances approach involves a practical, common-sense evaluation of all the information available to the magistrate, including the informant's reliability, the detail of the information, and any corroborating evidence, rather than a rigid formula.

The plain view doctrine allows evidence in plain sight to be seized without a warrant if the officer is lawfully present where the evidence is located and its incriminating nature is immediately apparent.

Voluntary consent by an individual with authority over the premises can justify a warrantless search, provided the consent is given freely and voluntarily without coercion.

The exclusionary rule is a judicially created remedy that makes evidence obtained through unconstitutional searches or seizures inadmissible at trial, serving to deter police misconduct and preserve judicial integrity.

Standing means that only individuals whose own Fourth Amendment rights have been violated can challenge a search or seizure, requiring them to demonstrate a legitimate expectation of privacy in the area searched or property seized.