menu

School of Law
1045 W. Maple St.
Robert A. Leflar Law Center
Waterman Hall
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR 72701

Phone: (479) 575-5601

Law School Directory

Visit the School of Law

Facebook Twitter Linkedin Youtube

Prof. Bailey – Criminal Procedure Course Materials

Prior to start of Criminal Procedure (Fall 2014), you will need to pick up the Syllabus from Ms. Briggs Room 183B (or download it below). In this Syllabus you will find required materials, along with First Assignment instructions due prior to start of first day of class. Assignment due Monday, August 25 at start of class. You may email Ms. Briggs at aabriggs@uark.edu if you have any questions.

Also, please forward your email to Ms. Briggs a.s.a.p. You will most likely have daily emails with attachments.

Crim Pro Syllabus – Fall 2014

Please purchase Criminal Procedure Investigation and Right to Counsel – 2nd Edition. The bookstore should have this new edition available no later than 1st week of classes. The Supplement is NOT required!

Pringle v. UnitedStates — Long Fact Pattern

Bailey CrimPro Query Form

Hypothetical Citizen X – Additional Facts

Pringle_v._United_States.pdf

“Watching the Watchmen: Are Police Officers’ Body-Worn Cameras a Win for Accountability?”

New York Times Readings

“Unbridled Security”

“Why Police Lie Under Oath”

Fourth Amendment Readings

The circumstances surrounding the adoption of the Fourth Amendment indicate the nuances in the language used cannot readily be construed as clear evidence of the framer’s intent. It appears that the House never consciously agreed to the present form of the Amendment. As proposed by the Committee of eleven, the provision read:

“That right — to be secured in their persons, papers, houses, and effects shall not be violated by warrants issuing —.”

That was corrected to read:

“The right — to be secure — against unreasonable searches and seizures not be violated by warrants issuing.

At that point, Mr. Benson objected to the words, “by warrants issuing” as not being sufficient. His proposal that they be altered to read: “and no warrant shall issue” lost by a considerable majority. However, Benson, as Chairman of the Committee appointed to arrange the Amendments, reported his version (the rejected version) of the Amendment. His alteration was never noticed and was subsequently agreed to by the Senate and ratified by the states in that form.

A. What is a “Search?”

Ark. Const. Art. 2, s 15 (2008)

s. 15. Unreasonable searches and seizures.

The right of the people of this State to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue, except upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or thing to be seized.

B. Probable Cause

C. The Exclusionary Rule – What happens if the 4th Amendment is violated?

D. Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement – “Exigent Circumstances”

E. Exigent Circumstances and the Automobile

F. Containers

G. Police Discretion and Profiling

H. “Plainview” Exception

I. Public Arrest and Arrest in Suspect’s Own or 3rd Party’s Home

J. Standing

K. Search Incident to Arrest

L. Consent Searches

M. “Reasonableness” — less than Probable Cause to “Stop”

N. Test for “Articulable Suspicion”

O. Profiles, Consensual or “Terry” Stops (“Seizure”)

P. “Seizure” of Person — “Chase” Context

Q. Search and Seizure of Persons — Special Conditions

R. Inventory Searches

S. Road Blocks

T. Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

Misc.

Fifth Amendment Readings

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamouse crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Clark v. State

A. Scope of the Fifth Amendment

  • Brown v. Walker (dissent), p. 753-54
  • Counselman v. Hitchcock, p. 754
  • Brown v. Walker, p. 757
  • Kastigar v. U.S., p. 762
  • Schmerber v. California, p. 291
  • Missouri v. McNeeley
  • New Jersey v. Portash, p. 786
  • U.S. v. Afflebaum, p. 787
  • California v. Byers, p. 789
  • Baltimore City Dept. of Social Services v. Bouknight, p. 791

B. Police Interrogation – When Does the Fifth Apply? (The Sixth Amendment Option)

  • Bram v. U.S., p. 806
  • Brown v. Mississippi, p. 807
  • Massiah v. U.S., p. 813
  • Fellers v. United States
  • Escobedo v. Illinois, p. 817

C. Massiah in “Custody” or in Jail

D. The Rule and the Familiar Warnings

E. What is “Interrogation”

F. What is Custody?

G. Invoking Miranda’s Second Level (Silence or Counsel)

H. Waiving Miranda Rights

I. Waiving Massiah Rights

  • Brewer v. Williams, p. 920

J. Inevitable Discovery

K. “Public Safety” Exception to Miranda

L. Fruit of the Poisonous Tree and Miranda

M. Admissibility of a Confession While a Citizen is Under Arrest or is “in Detention”

N. “Free Will” and Waiver of Miranda Rights

O. “Harmless” Constitutional Error

P. Impeachment with a Product of a Miranda Violation

Q. Miranda Revisited

Sixth Amendment Readings

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

A. The Right to the Assistance of Counsel – Guilt Determining, Sentencing, & Revocation Proceedings

B. Right to Counsel on Appeal – Appeal of Right

  • Griffin v. Illinois, p. 139
  • Douglass v. California, p. 139
  • Ross v. Moffitt (Discretionary Appeal), p. 140

C. Right to Counsel – Where the Penalty is Only a Fine

  • Mayer v. City of Chicago, p. 158
  • U.S. v. MacCollom, p. 159
  • Williams v. Illinois, p. 161
  • Tate v. Short, p. 161
  • Bearden v. Georgia, p. 162

D. Indigent Defendant’s Right to an Expert

  • Ake v. Oklahoma, p. 166

E. Effective Assistance of Counsel

F. Multiple Representation

  • Casebook, p. 196-99
  • Cuyler v. Sullivan, p. 200

G. Pro Se Representation

  • Faretta v. California, p. 215
  • McKaskle v. Wiggins, p. 231
  • Morris v. Slappy, p. 238
  • Anders v. California, p. 238
  • McCoy v. Ct. of Appeals of Wisconsin, p. 239
  • Penson v. Ohio, p. 238

H. Implications of Forfeiture Statutes

  • Caplin & Drysdale Chartered v. U.S., p. 241

I. The Right to counsel at Lineups, Showups, and Photographic Arrays

J. The Due Process Approach – Revisited

K. Entrapment – Scope of the Rule

  • Jacobson v. U.S., p. 972
  • U.S. v. Russell, p. 983

School of Law

1045 W. Maple St.
Robert A. Leflar Law Center
Waterman Hall
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR 72701

Phone: (479) 575-5601

Law School Directory

University of Arkansas School of Law