1. Chapter 5
Police Officers and the Law
Learning Objectives
After completion of this chapter, students should be able to:
1. Understand procedural laws and how they govern police actions.
2. Identify landmark cases that established the exclusionary rule.
3. Describe exceptions to seizure without a warrant.
4. Understand a citizen’s rights while being interrogated.
5. Identify the circumstances when police can make an arrest or hold someone in custody.
Chapter Outline
I. Procedural Law and Oversight of the Police
II. Rules of Evidence
The Exclusionary Rule
Fruit of the Poisoned Tree Doctrine
Application to State Courts: Mapp v. Ohio
Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule
III. Search and Seizure
The Fourth Amendment and the Right to Privacy
Search Incident to Lawful Arrest
Plain-View Searches
Consent to Search

2. Search of Automobiles
Search of Persons
IV. Other Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement
Public Safety Exceptions
The Good Faith Exception
Issues of Privacy
Deadly Force and Fleeing-Felon Doctrine
V. Interrogations and Confessions
Waiver of Rights
Standards for an Admissible Confession
Use of Physical Punishment and Pain
The Right to an Attorney
Delayed Court Appearance
Limits on Deception
Miranda Rights
Right to Remain Silent
Police Lineups
Juveniles
Interrogations and the War on Terrorism
VI. Arrest
Entrapment and Police Intelligence Activities
Enemy Combatants
Key Terms

3. Arrest (p. 88) restricting the freedom of a person by taking him or her into police custody
Carroll doctrine (p. 81) terms allowing admissibility of evidence obtained by police in a
warrantless search of an automobile when the police have probable cause that a crime has
occurred and delaying a search could result in losing evidence
Clear and present danger (p. 84) a condition relating to public safety that may justify police
use of deadly force against a fleeing suspect
Deadly force (p. 83) the power of police to incapacitate or kill in the line of duty
Entrapment (p. 88) the illegal arrest of a person based on criminal behavior for which the police
provided both the motivation and the means, tested in Jacobsen v. United States (1992)
Exclusionary rule (p. 76) a rule that prohibits the use of evidence or testimony obtained in
violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, established in Weeks v.
United States (1914) and extended to all state courts in Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Fifth Amendment (p. 85) provides several important due process rights regarding the rights of
the defendant
Fleeing-felon doctrine (p. 83) the police practice of using deadly force against a fleeing suspect,
made illegal in Tennessee v. Garner (1985), except when there is clear and present danger to the
public
Fruit of the poisoned tree doctrine (p. 77) a rule of evidence that extends the exclusionary rule
to secondary evidence obtained indirectly in an unconstitutional search, established in
Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States (1918) and in Wolf v. Colorado (1949)
Good faith exception (p. 82) an exception to the requirement that police must have a valid
search warrant or probable cause when they act in good faith on the belief that the search was
legal
Indigent defense (p. 86) the right to have an attorney provided free of charge by the state if a
defendant cannot afford one, established in Gideon v.Wainwright (1963)
Material witness law (p. 89) a law that allows for the detention of a person who has not
committed a crime but is suspected of having information about a crime and might flee or refuse
to cooperate with law enforcement officials
Miranda rights p. 86) rights that provide protection from self-incrimination and confer the right
to an attorney, of which citizens must be informed before police arrest and interrogation,
established in Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Pat-down doctrine (p. 81) the right of the police to search a person for a concealed weapon on
the basis of reasonable suspicion, established in Terry v. Ohio (1968)

4. Plain-view search (p. 80) the right of the police to gather without a warrant evidence that is
clearly visible
Police lineup (p. 87) an opportunity for victims to identify a criminal from among a number of
suspects
Probable cause (p. 79) the likelihood that there is a direct link between a suspect and a crime
Procedural law (p. 79) the body of laws governing how things should be done at each stage of
the criminal justice process
Public safety exception (p. 82) the right of the police to search without probable cause when not
to do so could pose a threat of harm to the public
Rules of evidence (p. 76) administrative court rules governing the admissibility of evidence in a
trial
Search incident to lawful arrest (p. 79) the right of police to search a person who has been
arrested without a warrant
Search warrant (p. 79) legal permission, signed by a judge, for police to conduct a search
Self-incrimination (p. 86) statements made by a person that might lead to criminal prosecution
Sixth Amendment (p. 85) provides the defendant constitutionally protected rights related to the
trial, witnesses, and right to counsel
Wiretapping (p. 83) a form of search and seizure of evidence involving communication by
telephone
Chapter Summary
As part of the checks and balances within the criminal justice system, there are constitutional
amendments that provide guarantees against misconduct by police. Police practices are also
affected by city, state, and federal legislative bodies that pass laws to limit or expand police
jurisdiction. Additionally, rules of evidence stipulate requirements for police procedures in
conducting searches and seizures, gathering evidence, making arrests, and conducting
interrogations.
The exclusionary rule, which defines admissibility of evidence in court, was extended to
states, as well as federal jurisdictions in the landmark case of Mapp v. Ohio. Under the Fourth
Amendment protects Americans are to be protected from unreasonable search and seizures.
However, there are exceptions to the exclusionary rule. These exceptions include: search incident
to lawful arrest, plain-view searches, consent to search, and the search of automobiles.

5. The police also have the authority to conduct a pat-down search of a person without
probable, but with reasonable suspicion, was established through the case of Terry v. Ohio. Other
exceptions to the exclusionary rule address situations such as: public safety, fleeing felons, good
faith mistakes, and some intelligence activities, such as wiretaps.
The Fifth Amendment protects Americans from self-incrimination, so that that a confession
cannot be obtained through physical coercion, lies, deceptions, unfair lineups, or denial of civil
rights. The rules of evidence also define lawful arrest, which may not involve entrapment. The
landmark case of Miranda v. Arizona had a historical impact on police practices regarding arrests
and interrogations of suspects.
However, the current war on terrorism is not without its criticism regarding the arrest and
detention of suspected terrorist, with respect to constitutional procedures. Critics have accused
the Justice Department for denying due process to many accused or suspected terrorist. Under
the Material Witness law, federal authorities can hold someone indefinitely if they suspect that
person is withholding information or evidence.
Media to Explore
Go to www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html to view the U.S. Constitution and
the various Amendments.
The National Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement maintains a roster of state
resources for civilian oversight of the police at www.nacole.org
Go to www.fbi.gov and in the search box enter “interrogations”. The resulting search will
provide links to numerous articles, publications, and press releases related to interrogation policy
and practices including the newly formed interrogation unit for “high value” terrorists.
Go to www.fbi.gov and in the search box enter “high speed chases”. The resulting search will
provide links to numerous articles, publications and press releases related to high speed police
chases.
For further information about military tribunals that have been proposed to try enemy
combatants and how they are different from military courts and criminal courts go to
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunal.