g. Probable Cause and Search Warrant Requirements
- Probable Cause Requirements
- Particular Information: Spinelli v. US (confidential informant gave tip that he was a bookmaker and gambler) A confidential informant’s tip here is insufficient probable cause to support a search warrant
- Aguilar-Spinelli Test:
- Basis of Knowledge: How did informant get the info?
- Veracity Prong: Why should I believe this person?
- Credibility of the information
- Reliability of the information
**this case is overruled
- Totality of the Circumstances Illinois v. Gates (anonymous letter that couple selling drugs in Florida) **Overrules Spinelli
- Applies Totality of the Circumstances Test: Did the magistrate have a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed based on the totality of the circumstances?
- Allows magistrate to consider seemingly innocent conduct in context
- Fact that they later found drugs doesn’t support probable cause
- Probable cause analysis very fact specific
- Individualized Suspicion and Common Enterprise
- Maryland v. Pringle (stops car w/3 people in it, finds cocaine, arrests all 3)
- Court applies totality of the circumstances test (time of day, cash in car, location of cocaine, men failed to offer info)
- Holding: a reasonable officer could have concluded there was probable cause to believe Pringle committed possession
- Seemingly innocent conduct can add up to probable cause
- Probable Cause in Action: DC v. Wesby (abandoned house w/party inside) – was there sufficient probable cause to arrest these individuals for unlawful entry?
- Holding: yes – under totality of the circumstances, a reasonable officer could disbelieve the claim of innocent entry and infer that they knew or should have known that they didn’t have permission to be in the house
- Basis for arrest: unlawful entry
- Standard: knew or should’ve known entered w/o permission
- Probable cause: condition of house, conduct of partygoers, reaction to police, evasive answers
- But this could all be explained innocently
- Key question for probable cause: whether a reasonable officer could conclude – considering all of the surrounding circumstances, including the plausibility of the explanation itself – that there was a substantial chance of criminal activity
- Probable cause = low bar
- Wesby & Gates: innocent behavior can add up to equal probable cause
- Executing Warrants
- Particular Description Requirement/Reasonableness in Execution
- Maryland v. Garrison (valid search warrant for 3rd floor but didn’t know it was 2 apartments)
- Did the factual mistake invalidate the warrant?
- Place to be searched must be described in the warrant with sufficient clarity that the officer executing it can identify it with reasonable effort – doesn’t have to be perfect and based on info known at the time presented to magistrate
- If a mistake is made in executing a warrant, the Court will allow the evidence to be used if the law enforcement mistake was objectively understandable and reasonable
- Questions to ask:
- Is it particularly descriptive?
- Was it executed in the right way? (here, yes & yes)
- Look at what a reasonable officer would’ve done
- Richards v. Wisconsin (had search warrant, magistrate wouldn’t give a no-knock warrant, officers undercover and not undercover, knocked but didn’t wait)
- Issue: whether the 4th am warrant requirement requires officer to knock-and-announce prior to executing a warrant?
- Holding: yes, police must knock-and-announce but there’s an exception –
- To justify no-knock entry, police must have a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing would be dangerous or futile, or that it would inhibit the effective investigation by, for example, allowing the destruction of evidence
- Or get a no-knock warrant
- Exigent circumstances = reasonable
h. Arrest (Seizure) Warrants – When do you need them?
- Felonies in Public: US v. Watson (informant told inspector would furnish stolen credit cards at next public meeting, inspector arrested after getting signal)
- Issue: whether the police may make a public arrest w/o a warrant or an exigent circumstance based solely on probable cause
- Holding: yes – police may arrest an individual in public w/o a warrant or w/o exigent circumstance if there is probable cause
- Defer to congress (congress made it legal for postal officers to do this)
- Common law allowed
- Officer doesn’t have to see the crime if it is a felony
- Powell concurrence: needs to explain why less protection for warrantless seizure
- Marshall dissent: there was an exigent circumstance here, police can get a warrant and sit on it until the timing is right for arrest (back pocket warrants)
- Rule: post Watson, a warrant is not necessary for a police officer to make an arrest in a public place so long as he has probable cause to believe a felony has been committed
- Felonies in Home: Payton v. NY (developed probable cause to believe murder, went to arrest him and broke into home w/crowbar – no warrant / armed robbery and arrested in home when they came in and found drugs)
- Issue: whether the 4th am forbids a warrantless arrest in the home, even if supported by probable cause
- Holding: yes – to arrest an individual in his home, probable cause is not enough; instead, must have a warrant or an exigent circumstance
- Running into house = exigent circumstance
- Police can create the exigent circumstance by chasing you into the house
- Rule: need an arrest warrant (or exigent circumstances) for arrests in the home
- Misdemeanors in Public: Atwater v. City of Lago Vista (didn’t have seatbelts on – arrested her)
- Issue: whether the 4th am forbids a warrantless arrest for a minor criminal offense, such as a misdemeanor
- Holding: no – probable cause standard, allowing a warrantless arrest, applies to all arrests
- If an officer has probable cause to believe that an individual has committed even a minor criminal offense in his presence, the officer may, w/o violating the 4th am, arrest the offender
- Arrests in public vs. home
- Warrantless arrests in public (Watson and Atwater): police can make a public arrest based only on probable cause
- Warrantless arrest in the home (Payton): police cannot arrest individuals in the home based on probable cause alone, need either a warrant or an exigent circumstance
- Pretextual Warrantless “Seizures”: Whren v. US (saw driver stop too long at traffic signal and looking down at passenger’s lap)
- Issue: whether an arrest or other 4th am seizure, such as a traffic stop, made on probable cause may nonetheless be “unreasonable” because of the officer’s subjective motives
- Officer’s subjective intent is irrelevant
- So long as a traffic stop is supported by probable cause that a traffic violation has occurred, the seizure (traffic stop) is lawful under the 4th am, regardless of officer’s ulterior motives
- **this case is not limited to traffic stops