Preview

Criminal Procedures

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
574 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Criminal Procedures
Criminal Justice Term Paper
Throughout the Criminal Justice System there are many causes where people discuss the matters of arrests and probable cause. In the case of Garcia vs. Merced County probable cause and search warrants were discussed. The case centers around a criminal defense attorney who was accused of being willing of smuggling contraband to county inmates. John Garcia was accused of the crime by Officers Cardwood and Taylor based on information given to them by an inmate informant named Robert Plunkett. Garcia was never charged with any criminal offences; however, he sewed Officers Cardwood and Taylor in federal court for violations and his rights for false arrests. In order to completely understand the case in depth discussion of the elements, the court judgment, and my thoughts of the case are all important parts to consider. All of Garcia’s trouble began when the inmate Robert Plunkett told Special Agent Alfredo Cardwood and Merced Deputy Sheriff John Taylor that he knew of an attorney who would smuggle drugs to prisoners. As a result of the information the officers received from Plunkett a reverse sting to catch Garcia was plotted. During the reverse sting Garcia accepted the contraband from inmate Plunkett and took them back to his office. Thus caused Officers Cardwood and Taylor to pursue and receive a search warrant for Garcia’s office. The search of the office resulted in a small plastic bag that contained methamphetamine in it, a small amount of methamphetamine, a one pound scale and six packages of Bugler tobacco. Garcia claimed that the meth was “spillage” from when his investigator flushed down the toilet. No charges were ever brought in the case, but Garcia sued Cardwood and Taylor for violating his civil rights for false arrest. The Ninth Court of Appeals remanded the case back to the district court for entry of judgment for Officers Cardwood and Taylor. The court sent the case back because they felt that the trial judge was wrong

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    A confidential informant entered a suspected drug dealer’s apartment in order to purchase crack cocaine. Once the transaction was completed, the confidential informant signaled an undercover officer who then radioed uniformed police to the suspect’s apartment. Once officers responded to the scene, they approached the door of the apartment and encountered a strong odor of burning marijuana. Officers then announced their presence while knocking on the apartment door. Once the announcement of “police” was made, the officers then heard shuffling noises inside of the apartment that were consistent with the sound of evidence being destroyed. Officers then announced their intent to enter the apartment and then kicked in the door. Once inside the apartment, the officers found drugs and drug paraphernalia in plain view. Inside of the apartment, officers apprehended the respondent, King, and others, who were in possession of drugs.…

    • 396 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Minnesota vs. Timothy Dickerson, two police officers parked in an unmarked car, outside of an apartment building known for trafficking contraband substances, did willfully and knowingly stop and frisk respondent due to suspicious and evasive behavior, exiting the twelve-unit apartment building. The officers felt that upon his exit and approach towards patrol car, and eye contact with one of the officers, he turned and proceeded into a side alley. Officers then pursued respondent feeling his suspicious and evasive behavior was probable of being criminal in nature. They pulled their car into the alley and immediately stopped and searched the defendants outer clothing finding no weapons. During the cursory search one officer testified that he had felt a cellophane bag containing crack cocaine later when weighed a total of 1/5th of a gram was found. The officers claimed it within their scope to search and seize what the officer suspected to be drugs inside the defendants clothing.…

    • 510 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 2002, Lemon Montrea Johnson was the passenger in the backseat of a car stopped for a traffic violation. Johnson was charged with; inter alia, possession of drugs and possession of a weapon by a felon. These items were discovered during a protective pat-down search of Johnson. Johnson was convicted by the trial court. Johnson argued that his conviction should be overturned because the trial court was in error by denying his motion to suppress the evidence. He argued that he had been unlawfully “seized” because being a passenger in a vehicle does not automatically constitute “seizure.” He furthered argued that even if he had been “seized,” that by the time Officer Trevizo searched him he was no longer “seized” as their conversation had become consensual. Furthermore, the evidence should not be considered because the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights and because the…

    • 4995 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Facts: This case deals with the defendant Patrick Knowles; who was stopped in Newton, Iowa for driving 20 miles over the speed limit. The police officer at the time pulled Knowles over and issued him a ticket, but under the Iowa Code the officer could have arrested the individual. After writing Knowles a ticket the officer searched the vehicle, where under the driver’s seat he found a pipe that could be used to smoke Marijuana and a small bag of marijuana. Upon finding these two items Knowles was arrested and charged with having a controlled substance. At pre-trial, Knowles moved to suppress the marijuana and pipe from court. He claimed that the search was a violation of his rights and that…

    • 402 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Criminal Procedures Cj226

    • 828 Words
    • 4 Pages

    I believe that officer Smith did have every reason to pull over the car in question because there was not only the appearance of a broken tail light that had been taped up but also the car resembled a vehicle that had been used in the commission of another crime, that being the road side killing of another officer. Officer Smith’s observation that the vehicle may be the one in question from the killing of the other officer, she has every right to ask the occupant of the car to get out for a pat down for not only her safety but the safety of any others. Even though the woman didn’t have any weapons on her the officer didn’t know and that’s why she requested the pat down. Had the woman been carrying any weapons when the officer approached the car the officers life would have been in immediate danger so the officer error on the side of caution and did the right thing with the pat down.…

    • 828 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jardines, Fernandez motioned to have the evidence that was secured without a warrant suppressed but the motion was denied by the L.A District court. The court ruled that the officers acted reasonably and that it was enough to validate the search of the apartment. Fernandez was approved to go to the California court of appeals were they confirmed his Charges but denied his motion to suppress the…

    • 780 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Brief

    • 259 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Baltimore City Police department obtained a warrant to search the home of Lawrence McWebb located “third floor of 2036 Park Avenue” for controlled substances and related paraphernalia. The police believed that there was only one apartment on the third floor, which in fact there were actually 2; one belonging to Garrison (defendant) and McWebb, the person listed on the warrant. Upon entering and searching the apartment, officers found drugs and other drug paraphernalia at which time; they realized that they were in the wrong apartment. Because Garrison was in violation of Maryland’s Substance Abuse Act, he was arrested.…

    • 259 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Facts: Hollis D. King was arrested after a search of his apartment. Local police department officers had probable cause to force entering and searching King apartment. Incident to search and arrest stemmed from a strong odor of what appeared to be burning illegal narcotics. Prior to entering the apartment, Police Officers knocked on the door and announced their presence. The occupants in the apartments did not respond. Under the suspicion of valuable evidence being destroyed the officers forced entering into the apartment. As the officers entered the apartment the odor of the burning substance became stronger. The smell of the burning substance created the exigent circumstance in the probable cause and the case at trial. Without a warrant,…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Shenkley V. Tabuena

    • 1217 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In Gortarez, the shopkeeper, along with two other employees, approached the suspects in the parking lot as they were getting into their car. While there was some dispute as to the facts, one of the suspects testified that he saw one of the employees push the other suspect up against the car and search him. Although the employee did not ask the suspect for the item he was suspected of stealing, nor tell the suspect what it was that he was looking for, the suspect did not resist. The Supreme Court of Arizona held that the trial court erred in its finding of reasonable manner of detention. Id. at 815. In its reasoning, the Court pointed to the facts that there was no request for the suspect to remain, no inquiry was made as to whether the suspect possessed the vaporizer, the suspect did not resist or attempt to escape, and the nominal value of the item. The Court noted that the evidence adduced likely would have supported a finding that the manner of detention was unreasonable as a matter of law, and held that at best, there was a question of fact. Id. at…

    • 1217 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Supreme Court first found in the Reid case that the rule of common law did not apply to the Reid case. This is because the state of Virginia had already passed a statute stating that the evidence would not be competent in criminal cases, only in civil cases. The ruling goes on to state that the law that should be followed in federal criminal cases should follow the statutes and laws already set down by the states in which the trial by jury is taking place.…

    • 636 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    What procedural steps must the officers perform following John’s arrest and interview at the police station? A procedural step that officers must perform following Johns arrest and interview at the police station would be that John would have to be booked. Booked is where the suspect is charged for the crime they committed. Then the belongings he had on him at the time of his arrest would be taken from him and he would be photographed and fingerprinted. Fingerprinting is done when police want to confirm his identity and also to check for any warrants. After being booked John will be held for arraignment where he will stand before a judge. Once he is before a judge, he will determine if there is any probable cause for his arrest. This is where…

    • 151 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Plea Bargain

    • 857 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Brief: Respondent was arrested and charged with possession of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute, in violation of 84 Stat. 1260. On October 17, 1991, respondent and his attorney asked to meet with the prosecutor to discuss the possibility of cooperating with the Government. At the beginning of the meeting, the prosecutor informed respondent that he had no obligation to talk, but that if he wanted to cooperate, he would have to be completely truthful. As a condition of proceeding with the discussion, the prosecutor indicated that the respondent would have to agree that any statements he made could be used to impeach any contradictory testimony he might give at trial if it went that far. Respondent conversed with his counsel and agreed to proceed under the prosecutor’s conditions. The respondent admitted to knowing that the package he attempted to sell to the undercover cop did contain methamphetamine. Respondent claimed that he did not know Shuster was manufacturing methamphetamine at his residence and later confessed that he did know of Shuster manufacturing methamphetamine in his residence. Respondent minimized his role in Shuster’s methamphetamine operation by claiming that he had not visited Shuster’s residence for at least a week before his arrest. The government showed the respondent surveillance evidence showing that his car was at Shuster’s residence the day before the arrest. The meeting ended on the basis that the respondent failed to provide completely truthful information. Respondent was tried on the methamphetamine charges and took the stand at his own defense. He maintained that he was not involved in the methamphetamine trafficking and he had thought Shuster was using his home laboratory to make plastic explosives for the CIA. He denied knowing that the package he delivered to the…

    • 857 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    References: Albanese, J. S. (2013). Criminal Justice (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.…

    • 1665 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The police decided to enter Jones’s apartment without a warrant to find the drugs. The action of the police officer, an official of the government, entering Jones’s apartment without a warrant violated the defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights because it was a warrantless search. The defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his own apartment, and there was no emergency occurring that would have justified a warrantless search; thus the evidence obtained would be inadmissible under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” rule, which rules that evidence obtained indirectly from improper conduct should be excluded. In a similar case, Florida v. Jardines, a police officer used a police dog to confirm that the defendant had drugs on his property. The officer then used that information to obtain a search warrant to obtain the suspected drugs on the property. In that case, the Supreme Court concluded that “the use of the trained narcotics dog to investigate [the defendant’s] home was a Fourth Amendment search unsupported by probable cause, rendering invalid the warrant based upon information gathered in that search” (Florida v. Jardines). Consulting the Jardines case, the drugs seized in the illegal, warrantless search is “the fruit of the poisonous tree,” and in order for the evidence to be admissible, the officer should have obtained a search warrant before stepping on Jones’s property with the police dog, and the warrant should have been supported probable cause in order for it to be…

    • 939 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    After a series of threatening phone calls to the victim, Mr. Helman sent a birthday card laced with ricin to his ex-girlfriend’s boyfriend. He admitted to his attempt to one of his co-workers and they informed the police. His trial is November 17, 2014.…

    • 141 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays

Related Topics