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

  • Good Essays

    (3) Decision: The decision of the District Court was reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.…

    • 562 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    King’s attorney argued that the warrantless search and seizure of the evidence within the apartment violated his client’s fourth amendment rights. The attorney then filed a motion to suppress the evidence which he claimed was illegally obtained. The court found that the warrantless entry was justified due to exigent circumstances which the officers encountered when they approached the apartment. These circumstances included the strong odor presence of marijuana, failure to respond to the door, and the movement which sounded consistent with the destruction of evidence.…

    • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Facing a criminal charge can be frightening and intimidating and that is when you need a legal representative that is experienced and knowledgeable on your side. Here at our office you will find experience and knowledge that will help deal with charges such as: murder, domestic violence, theft, kidnapping and hit and run accidents.…

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory 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
  • 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 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
  • Good Essays

    Criminal Law

    • 1054 Words
    • 5 Pages

    An interesting case that was currently brought before the Supreme Court was Missouri vs. Frye. I found this case interesting due to the injustice that was provided by Frye’s counsel, and that Frye insisted on committing the same crime over and over again even though he knew he had an open case concerning driving under a suspended license. There were many sources and jurisdictions related to criminal law that also relates to this case. Criminal liability is when one takes responsibility for committing a crime, and accomplice liability is when someone helps someone commit a crime. Actus reus means guilty act, mens rea means guilty mind, and concurrence means the equality of rights. Actus reus and mens rea are both necessary in order for a defendant to prove criminal liability.…

    • 1054 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics