from:http://faculty.ncwc.edu/TOCONNOR/405/405lect07.htm

Argersinger v. Hamlin 407 U.S. 25 (1972) - extends the Escobedo right to counsel to misdemeanor cases if there is the possibility of imprisonment.

Arizona v. Evans 115 S. Ct. 1185 (1995) - allows exception to exclusionary rule if police are acting in good faith on a search warrant that is later declared invalid due to clerical error.

Arizona v. Hicks 480 U.S. 321 (1987) - allows seizure of evidence under "plain view" doctrine.

Bennis v. Michigan 116 S. Ct. 994 (1996) - civil (asset) forfeiture of property is constitutional even if the owner was not aware of its criminal use.

Berkemer v. McCarty 468 U.S. 420 (1984) - Miranda does not apply to traffic stops.

Briscoe v. LaHue 460 U.S. 325 (1983) - police officers enjoy immunity from civil lawsuits stemming from their testimony, even if such testimony is perjury.

Brown v. Mississippi 297 U.S. 278 (1936) - coerced confessions using brutality are inadmissible.

*Brown v. State 550 So2d 527 (1989) - replicas of weapons and how they can be used are admissible as real evidence in court.

Bumper v. North Carolina 391 U.S. 543 (1968) - evidence obtained by police who claim they have a warrant when in fact they do not is inadmissible; lower courts are divided on the issue of consent if police threaten they can easily obtain a warrant.

Carroll v. U.S. 267 U.S. 132 (1925) - authorizes warrantless searches of automobiles.

*CBS, Inc. v. Cobb 536 S. 2d 1067 (1988) - requires reporters to reveal their sources, evidence.

Chimel v. California 395 U.S. 752 (1969) - authorizes the "Chimel rule", police may search the area within a person's immediate control incidental to an arrest.

City of Canton v. Harris 489 U.S. 378 (1989) - a police department can be sued for failure to provide adequate training of its officers only if it amounts to "deliberate indifference".

Colorado v. Connelly 479 U.S. 157 (1986) - suspects can waive their Miranda rights even if they are not acting fully rational or are disoriented at the time.

Colorado v. Spring 479 U.S. 564 (1987) - interrogations where the defendant thinks they are being charged with a more minor crime is allowed.

*Commonwealth v. Rogers 485 Pa 132 (1979) - gruesome photos are not allowed as evidence.

Connecticut v. Barrett 479 U.S. 523 (1987) - an oral confession is admissible even if the suspect refuses to sign a written statement on advice of their attorney.

County of Riverside v. McLaughlin 500 U.S. 413 - detention of an arrestee for 48 hours is presumptively reasonable; if longer, police must prove reasonableness.

*Crumpton v. Commonwealth 9 Va App 131 (1989) - involves admissibility of polygraph under promise of no charges if results are favorable to defendant.

Delaware v. Prouse 440 U.S. 648 (1979) - police cannot stop a driver without probable cause.

Duckworth v. Eagan 492 U.S. 195 (1989) - the Miranda warnings need not be given in the exact form as worded in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), they must simply convey to the suspect his or her rights.

Edwards v. Arizona 451 U.S. 477 (1981) - a suspect who invokes their Miranda rights cannot be interrogated further until a lawyer is made available.

Escobedo v. Illinois 378 U.S. 478 (1964) - for any serious offense, a suspect is entitled to a lawyer during interrogation at a police station.

Frisbie v. Collins 342 U.S. 519 (1952) - an unlawful arrest does not deprive the court of jurisdiction to try a criminal case.

*Fuentes v. State 775 SW2d 64 (1989) - former testimony of privileged witness can be admissible.

*Funk v. U.S. 290 U.S. 371 (1933) - involves the husband-wife privilege, discusses evolution of common law.

Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963) - a lawyer must be appointed for any indigent (poor) person who is charged with a felony.

*Gillars v. U.S. 182 F2d 962 (1950) - swearing in witnesses with affirmation instead of oath is acceptable.

Graham v. Connor 490 U.S. 396 (1989) - individual police officers can be held liable for using excessive force under an "objective reasonableness", not due process standard.

Hafer v. Melo 502 U.S. 21 (1991) - government officials acting in their individual capacity can be sued for civil rights violations; they cannot be sued for acting in their official capacity.

Hampton v. U.S. 425 U.S. 484 (1976) - there is no entrapment if a police informant supplies drugs to a suspect who is already predisposed to commit the crime.

*Horton v. California 496 U.S. 128 (1990) - eliminates the "inadvertent (accidental) discovery" requirement in the plain view doctrine during searches in general.

*Huddleston v. U.S. 485 U.S. 681 (1988) - "similar acts" evidence used to establish mental state is admissible with proper instructions.

Illinois v. Gates 462 U.S. 213 (1983) - the two-pronged (Aguilar) test for probable cause established in Spinelli v. U.S. (1969) is abandoned in favor of a "totality of

circumstances" test.

Illinois v. Rodriguez 497 U.S. 177 (1990) - searches in which any person having "apparent authority" over an area gives consent are valid.

*In re Winship 397 U.S. 358 (1970) - requires reasonable doubt in juvenile cases.

Jacobson v. U.S. 503 U.S. 540 (1993) - updates the Sherman rule (Sherman v. U.S. 1958) on entrapment; entrapment occurs when agents originate a criminal design,

implant a disposition to commit the act in an innocent person's mind, and then induce commission of the act in order to prosecute.

Katz v. U.S. 389 U.S. 347 (1967) - overturns Olmstead v. U.S. (1928) which permitted electronic surveillance unless trespass, now requires warrant where expectation of privacy involved.

*Kentucky v. Whorton 441 U.S. 786 (1979) - short, spartan-type jury instructions are too short.

Kirby v. Illinois 406 U.S. 682 (1972) - a person has no right to counsel at police lineups or identification procedures if they have not been formally charged with a crime.

*Maddox v. Montgomery 718 F2d 1033 (1983) - prosecution cannot withhold exculpatory evidence.

Mapp v. Ohio 367 U.S. 643 (1961) -extends the exclusionary rule established in Weeks v. U.S. (1914) to state officials, evidence seized illegally is not admissible.

*Martin v. Ohio 480 U.S. 228 (1987) - discusses justification & excuses, places burden of affirmative defense on the defense.

Maryland v. Buie 494 U.S. 325 (1990) - authorizes a protective "sweep search" in a person's home during an arrest.

*Michigan v. Harvey 494 U.S. 344 (1990) - reaffirms "prophylactic rule", that police-initiated conversations in absence of attorney may only be used to impeach conflicting testimony and cannot be used in the prosecutions case-in-chief.

Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz 496 U.S. 444 (1990) - Sobriety checkpoints are constitutional.

*Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) - results of a police interrogation are not admissible unless suspect was given Miranda warnings and there is a valid waiver.

National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab 489 U.S. 656 (1989) - random, suspicionless drug testing programs are constitutional for employees of any organization involved in public safety.

New York v. Quarles 467 U.S. 649 (1984) - establishes public safety exception to Miranda rule.

Nix v. Williams 467 U.S. 431 (1984) - establishes exception to exclusionary rule if police can prove "inevitable discovery", they would have found it anyway, thru lawful means.

Oliver v. U.S. 466 U.S. (170) - police may enter and search unoccupied or undeveloped areas outside of a dwelling's "curtilage" without either a warrant or probable cause.

Patterson v. Illinois 487 U.S. 285 (1988) - a waiver of Miranda constitutes a waiver of the right to counsel as well as the privilege against self-incrimination.

Pennsylvania v. Muniz 496 U.S. 582 (1990) - videotape evidence of a suspect, such as a stop for driving while intoxicated, may be obtained without Miranda warnings.

*People v. Gordon 204 Ill App3d 123 (1990) - indicates a weak defense doesn't relieve prosecutor's burden.

*People v. Wofford 156 Ill. App3d 238 (1987) - establishes the spontaneous statement exception to hearsay rule.

Rhode Island v. Innis 446 U.S. 291 (1980) - casual conversation between police officers and suspects constitutes a "dialogue" and requires no Miranda warnings.

*Rock v. Arkansas 483 U.S. 44 (1987) - involves hypnosis-refreshed memory.

*Rodriguez v. State 697 SW2d 463 (1985) - the dying declaration exception to hearsay rule.

*Schmerber v. California 384 U.S. 757 (1966) - compelled "real evidence" like drawing blood, fingerprinting, and line-ups do not violate fifth amendment.

Sherman v. U.S. 356 U.S. 369 (1958) - a defendant is entrapped when the government induces them to commit a crime they would otherwise not have committed; updated in Jacobson.

*State v. Bibb 626 So2d 913 (1993) - involves competency to stand trial.

*State v. Chance 778 SW2d 457 (1989) -involves school records as documentary evidence.

*State v. Davis 877 SW2d 699 (1994) - autopsy photographs were too gruesome.

*State v. DeMarco 275 NJ Super. 311 (1994) - involves attorney-client privilege and discovery.

*State v. Jackson 112 Wash2d 867 (1989) - presumption of intent instruction must not be given without supporting evidence.

*State v. Perkins 130 W. Va. 708 (1947) - vigorous questioning by a judge can be prejudicial.

*State v. Scott 3 Ohio App2d 239 (1965) - judge may note things outside his jurisdiction.

*State v. Tailo 70 Haw 580 (1989) - involves validity/reliability of police radar guns.

*State v. Vejvoda 231 Neb 668 (1989) - judicial notice cannot invade jury's province of fact- finding.

Steagald v. U.S. 451 U.S. 204 (1981) - a arrest warrant does not permit entry into another person's dwelling where the suspect may be found.

Stoner v. California 376 U.S. 483 (1964) - a hotel clerk cannot give consent to search the room of a hotel guest.

Tennessee v. Garner 471 U.S. 1 (1985) - deadly force cannot be used to prevent the escape of a suspect unless there is a significant threat of death or injury to the officer or others.

Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 (1968) - a "stop and frisk" on reasonable suspicion is valid.

*Tome v. U.S. 115 S. Ct. 696 (1995) - only statements prior to source of bias can bolster an impeached witness; an exception to hearsay rule.

*Trammel v. U.S. 445 U.S. 40 (1980) - involves erosion of spousal testimonial privileges.

*U.S. v. Alvarez 584 F2d 694 (1978) - with hearsay, trustworthiness requires corroboration.

*U.S. v. DeSoto 885 F2d 354 (1989) - experts in surveillance technology, law enforcement, and drug dealer methodology appropriate if not implying guilt.

*U.S. v. Dockins 986 F2d 888 (1993) - involves fingerprint cards as documentary evidence.

U.S. v. Good 510 U.S. 43 (1993) - civil (asset) forfeiture in addition to criminal prosecution does not constitute double jeopardy;

owners of property to be seized must simply be given notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard.

*U.S. v. Hitt 981 F2d 422 (1992) - photograph of defendant's gun collection was prejudicial.

*U.S. v. Kelly 14 F3d 1169 (1994) - requires seals on evidence bags, chain of custody.

*U.S. v. Langford 802 F2d 1176 (1986) - Eyewitness testimony needs experts.

*U.S. v. Leon 468 U.S. 897 (1984) - allows exception to exclusionary rule if police are acting in good faith on a search warrant that is later declared invalid, due to judicial error.

*U.S. v. Martinez 3 F3d 1191 (1993) - involves DNA test results.

*U.S. v. Nelson 419 F2d 1237 (1969) - jury cannot convict on basis of inference from inference (circumstantial evidence).

*U.S. v. Phibbs 999 F2d 1053 (1993) - involves credibility of incompetent witnesses, discusses essential witnesses.

*U.S. v. Piccinonna 885 F2d 1529 (1989) - involves results of polygraph tests.

*U.S. v. Spivey 841 F2d 799 (1988) - right to cross-examine a hostile witness is not unlimited.

*Victor v. Nebraska 114 S. Ct. 1239 (1994) - involves proper instructions to a jury by a judge.

Warden v. Hayden 387 U.S. 294 (1967) - allows a warrantless search if probable cause and exigent circumstances are present, a "nexus"; "mere evidence" may be admitted.

Wilson v. Arkansas 115 S. Ct. 1914 (1995) - allows "no-knock" serving of a warrant if there are exigent circumstances, otherwise police must knock and announce themselves.

Wong Sun v. U.S. 371 U.S. 471 (1963) - established "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine in the exclusionary rule, any evidence following from an illegal police act is inadmissible.