Lesson 5: Policing in a Modern Society

Chapter 4: Policing in a Modern Society

Basic Police Functions:

Law enforcement
Maintain order
Community service

Quality control of police agencies primarily done through:

Proper selection (hiring and promotion)
Training
Supervision
Discipline and enforcement of clear policies and procedures

Education

Degree requirements:

· 16% of state police agencies require 2-year degree

· 4% of state agencies require 4-year degree

· 9% of large municipal agencies require a 2-year degree

· 2% of large municipal agencies require 4-year degree

Most practitioners feel that college educated officers:

· communicate better (both orally and in writing)

· generate less complaints

· show more initiative

· act more professionally

· are less likely to be disciplinary problems

· better decision makers

· have greater self confidence and self assurance

However, 82% of departments felt college education was important in promotions.

Discretion

Discretion can be described as decision making by police within certain guidelines or parameters. Factors influencing police discretion:

· Environment. An officer’s view of community values influence discretion.

· Departmental influences. Policies, practices, customs of the department influence discretion.

· Situational influences. Defendant’s demeanor, witnesses, nature of the encounter, etc.

· Legal factors. Is crime serious?

· Extralegal factors. Class, race, age, gender.

Traffic Services

Traffic related enforcement comprises the largest amount of “officer time” but is usually considered the least glamorous and is low on the department’s and community’s list of priorities.

Persons killed in 2002 in US- 42,815 (1.5% increase over 2001 and highest since 1990)

Police Traffic Services:

Traffic Enforcement
Crash Investigation
Traffic Direction and Control
Traffic Ancillary Services (education, engineering, etc.)

Pretext stop (or dual motive stop): Traffic violation is used as a pretext to investigate other suspicious activity

Whren v. United States (1996): Traffic stop, and subsequent search, is admissible if the reason for the stop was valid

Supreme Court held- “The temporary detention
                                    of a motorist upon probable cause to believe that he has violated the traffic laws does not violate the Fourth Amendment's
                                    prohibition against unreasonable seizures, even if a reasonable officer would not have stopped the motorist absent some additional
                                    law enforcement objective.”

Mimms order: Officers may order drivers to exit vehicle (Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 1977)

Racial profiling: any police-initiated action that relies on race, ethnicity, or national
                                    origin rather than behavior

American policing is faced with the challenge- the widespread perception that police
                                    are routinely guilty of racial bias. As a result, 24 states have passed legislation dealing with racial profiling. Much of
                                    the legislation involves data collection.

The Fourth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution provides that:

“[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized."

Stop and Frisk

Terry v. Ohio (1968): Supreme Court held that a brief detention of persons to “investigate” and a “pat down” of their outer clothing for weapons, based upon a reasonable suspicion they are involved in or about to become involved in a crime and are armed, is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Stop and Frisk:

Officers briefly detain a suspicious person

Legal evidentiary standard- officer must have a reasonable suspicion that subject involved or about to be involved in criminal activity

Officers may conduct a “patdown” of outer clothing for weapons

Legal evidentiary standard- officer must have reasonable suspicion that subject is armed

Continuum of contacts or Evidence Continuum

More Evidence

Less Evidence

Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (Conviction)

Probable Cause (Arrest)

Reasonable Suspicion (Terry Stop)

Mere Hunch

May police apprehend and detain a person who flees police in a high crime area? Yes, according to Illinois v. Wardlow (2000)

Plain View/Feel: Officer may seize evidence or contraband in plain view if they have a legal right to be there. Use of flashlights is permitted. Police may seize contraband during a “frisk” if it is immediately apparent to the officer the object is an illegal substance. Police may not manipulate object (Minnesota v. Dickerson, 1993). Luggage searches: Police may “look but not feel” when screening traveler luggage.

Arrest

Arrest: The intentional act by a law enforcement officer to take a person into custody for the purpose of charging him/her with a crime.

Ingredients:

1. Intention

2. Authority

3. Custody

4. Purpose of charging with a crime

An officer may arrest when:

1. A crime was committed in the presence of an officer.

2. An arrest warrant is issued.

3. Probable cause exists to believe a person has committed a felony or other crime established by law authorizing a probable cause arrest

Probable cause: Evidence required establishing reasonable grounds for believing a crime has been committed and a particular person committed the crime.

Probable cause:

For an arrest- More likely than not that the person to be arrested has committed a crime
For a search- More likely than not that a place contains evidence of a crime, stolen property, or contraband

Brinegar v. United States (1949):

Evidence must be within officer’s knowledge (before arrest or search)
Evidence must be trustworthy
Warrant a man of reasonable caution to believe

Probable cause may be based on what is-

Observed
Information obtained

Informant: A person who may provide useful information about a case but is not a complainant, witness, victim, or suspect. Informants may be interested citizens or criminals interested in making deals.

Types of informants:

· Anonymous informants: Identity is not known to the investigator. They are identified by code or number, e.g., as in Crimestoppers.

· Confidential informants: Identity is known to the investigator. They wish to remain anonymous to the court and others.

· Reliable confidential informants: Confidential informants whose credibility has been established and documented, e.g., information lead to prior arrests, recovered property, etc.

Searches

Constitutional requirements for a legal search and seizure:

1. Reasonableness (scope, justification, etc., are reasonable).

2. Warrant

Based on probable cause (in affidavit)
Supported by oath or affirmation

3. Particularity (specificity)

· Specify places to be searched

· Specify persons/things to be seized

Procedures for obtaining search warrants vary by locality, but generally, search warrant may be issued under these circumstances:

Property was stolen or embezzled
Possession of the property is a crime
Property is in possession of someone with intent to commit a crime
Property was used in committing a crime
Items tend to show a crime was committed or that a specific person committed a crime

Exceptions to the search warrant requirement:

1. Arrest warrant execution: Police may search a suspect’s home to execute an arrest warrant. Officers may make a limited protective sweep of the home, if necessary (Maryland v. Buie, 1990)

2. Frisks: Police may conduct a “patdown” of persons they reasonable suspect is armed and dangerous. This is a protective search for weapons, only. (Terry v. Ohio)

3. Search Incidental to Arrest: Police may search a person they have arrested for weapons and evidence and area under immediate control (“wing span”) (Chimel v. California, 1969)

4. Automobile Exception: Police may search a vehicle without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe the automobile contains evidence of a crime (Carroll v. United States, 1925 and United States v. Ross, 1982) Although the courts have been lenient in allowing warrantless searches of automobiles, it is advisable to obtain a warrant when an automobile is no longer mobile or is in the custody of the police (e.g., impounded).

5. Consent: Police may search when consent is given voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.

6. Plain View/Feel: Officer may seize evidence or contraband in plain view if they have a legal right to be there. Use of flashlights is permitted. Police may seize contraband during a “frisk” if it is immediately apparent to the officer the object is an illegal substance. Police may not manipulate object (Minnesota v. Dickerson, 1993). Luggage searches: Police may “look but not feel” when screening traveler luggage.

7. Abandoned property: Property abandoned, including items thrown away in a pursuit, may be searched without a warrant.

8. Open fields: Open fields may be searched without a warrant even if they are posted with “No Trespassing” signs. However, curtilage is protected and may not be searched without a warrant.

9. Inventory: Police may conduct inventory searches of property seized if it is a standard procedure of the department

10. Exigent circumstances: Emergency exists and there is no time to obtain a warrant. Examples- danger to life, escape, destruction/removal of evidence

Police technology: Wiretapping, electronic surveillance, thermal imaging, etc., considered a search and a warrant is required.

Trash cans searches. Trash left in containers on public property (alley) may be searched without a warrant. Containers left in curtilage may not be searched. Curtilage is that private area around a house not normally open to the public.

K-9 searches: Courts have held that “dog-sniffs” of inanimate objects or public locations are not searches. Dog sniff of a person “generally considered a search”.

Exclusionary Rule

Exclusionary rule: Illegally seized evidence (i.e., evidence seized in violation of the Constitution) is inadmissible in court.

Weeks v. United States (1914): Evidence seized without a warrant by federal agents was inadmissible in federal court.

Mapp v. Ohio (1961) applied the exclusionary rule the states.

United States v. Leon (1984): Provided a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule.

Rationale for exclusionary rule: deters police from illegally collecting evidence if it will not be used in court.

Interrogations

Interview: The planned questioning of a witness, victim (primary and secondary), informant, or other person for the purpose of gaining information about a crime or incident.

Interrogation: The process of gaining a confession or admission

Admission- contains some incriminating information about a crime but falls short of a confession

Confession- Complete (or near complete) information supporting the elements of a crime

Sixth Amendment: Provides right to counsel. The court held in Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) that persons have the right to counsel during police interrogations.

Fifth Amendment provides: no person “shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”. It also provides protection against double jeopardy and the right to due process of law.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966): U. S. Supreme Court case requiring that persons in custody must waive their rights prior to an interrogation.

Custody: deprivation of freedom of action in any significant way

Rights include:

1. The right to remain silent.

2. The right to be told that anything said can and will be used in court.

3. The right to consult with an attorney prior to answering any questions and the right to have an attorney present during interrogation.

4. The right to counsel. If the suspect cannot afford an attorney, the court will appoint one.

It is common practice for the officer to ask the suspect if he or she understands the rights as they have been explained. If the answer is yes, then the officer may ask if the subject wishes to talk with the officer. At this point, the alternatives open to the suspect are four:

· The suspect may choose to remain silent.

· The suspect may request counsel.

· The suspect may indicate a desire not to talk with the investigators.

· The suspect may waive his or her rights and agree to talk with police without the benefit of counsel.

Waiver of rights must be:

Voluntary
Knowingly
Intelligently

Structure of Police Agencies

Basic police agency structure/functions:

· Patrol

· Investigative

· Support

Patrol

Purposes of Patrol:

· Deter crime by maintaining a visible presence.

· Maintain order.

· Respond quickly to violations, disturbances, emergencies.

· Identify and apprehend law violators.

· Aid individuals and care for those who cannot help themselves.

· Facilitate movement of traffic and people.

· Create a feeling of security.

Majority of patrol activity is maintaining order or peacekeeping, e.g., handling disturbances.

Investigations

Phases of the investigation:

Preliminary investigation (crime scene investigation, initial interviews, etc)
Follow-up investigation (follow up on leads, conduct surveillance, research records, etc)

Investigative divisions are generally organized into sections such as vice, drugs, homicide, robbery, burglary, auto theft, or sex crimes (depending on the size/need of the department).

Support Services

· Personnel

· Internal affairs

· Budgeting and finance

· Records and communication

· Training

· Community relations

· Crime prevention

· Laboratory

· Planning and research