Circumstantial Evidence Analysis

In chapter thirteen, Anderson and Gardner discuss the measures in gathering evidence to identify an offender in a criminal trial. In a criminal trial, the prosecutor must prove the crime alleged of the suspect did occur (prove of corpus delicti), and/or that the defendant committed or was a party to the crime committed. Therefore, direct and circumstantial evidence is used to substantiate the defendant has committed the crime. Identification evidence may account for several factors, in which include: “identification by the victim of the crime. Identification by the eyewitnesses. Confessions, admissions, or incriminating statements by the defendant or his associates showing that the defendant committed the crime or was a party to the crime.
Physical evidence- or real evidence is defined as physical objects, such as weapons, drugs, and clothing. The techniques used to obtain physical evidence ultimately vary from each circumstance. In particular, this chapter highlights the confiscation of evidence in situations lacking the use of a search warrant. In regard to, obtaining physical evidence from the person of suspect, there are three types of encounters in which occur between citizens and law enforcement officers. The first encounter can be voluntary. A voluntary conversation usually takes place in a public area and in which the individual is permitted to leave the encounter at any given moment. An investigation stop, or Terry stop, is solely on the officer’s discretion. An officer with reasonable suspicion to believe “crime is afoot” is able to stop and question an individual. For example, if a police officer is patrolling an area with high crime rates of burglary and comes across an individual circling a house in search of a point of entry. The officer under reasonable doubt of recent burglaries can approach and question the suspect of his/her current intentions. The final encounter is an arrest that is justified by probable cause to believe that the person has committed the crime. In most cases, evidence has been weighted against the individual, in which is followed by an
These exceptions include: consent, exigency, incident to a lawful arrest, inventory searches, and protective sweeps. Consent searches are voluntarily and clearly given. Consent searchers are limited to the area or object consented to be searched. For example, the voluntary search of an individual’s backpack is strictly concentrated to the item and nothing further, if so, the officer would be violating the individual’s fourth amendment. A protective search can be authorized, if the officer has reasonable suspicion that an individual “may be armed and presently dangerous” (Pg. 351). Furthermore, the incident to a lawful arrest permits officers to search and seize any evidence of the individual being arrested. According to the case, Chimel v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court held the search of the area within the immediate control of the arrested person for weapons and evidence of the crime may be made incident to arrest. I personally believe this is important because the safety of the officer comes first and the preservation of evidence is crucial. As for inventory searches, officers are preserving evidence of the suspect, not as incriminating evidence, but for safety measures. For example, when an individual is arrested, the officer is required to confiscate any items belonging to the individual, and thus the items are documented and processed by the department. The