ipl-logo

Aguilar And Gates Case Essay

537 Words3 Pages

Aguilar and Gates Case There are two well-known cases that, sparked up controversy over CI’s and probable cause and how much of it police officers have. In fact, in some areas of a community are people that are paid to tell the police information. The information must be valid, truthful and it must lead to the person being convicted of their charges. Furthermore, CI’s are the ones that come on crime shows that are in the interrogation room giving up all the information (Isikoff, 2002). Speaking of probable cause and CI’s this analysis, will outline the difference between the Aguilar and Gates case, in terms of the requirements used by the court to establish probably cause for a warrant.

Furthermore, when the courts are trying to get the conviction they must utilize all the evidence and information that they retrieve from CI’s. In fact, the Aguilar case they had to establish the two-pronged test for CI’s. The CI must provide accurate and valid key information that will end in the suspect being convicted of all their charges. In addition, “reiterates the two-pronged Aguilar test for probable cause if the information is given by a CI: namely, reliability of the informant and reliability of the information (“Lecture 3, 2009”). In the Aguilar case, the issue of probable cause started where the FBI had information leading to a …show more content…

In fact, as it states in (Zalman, 2011), “Probable cause known facts that would lead a reasonably prudent person to draw a conclusion about unknown facts” (p.129). Furthermore, another cause that will be discussed is the Gates case, where police had received a letter in regards to Gates and his wife. This Gates and his wife was supposedly selling drugs out of their home as it states in the letter that had gotten to police. Because of this case, is why the exclusionary rule applies, removing all insufficient information (Illinois V. Gates.

Show More
Related
1331 Words | 6 Pages

This idea is based on a reasonable officer’s inference that a crime has been committed in their

Read More
637 Words | 3 Pages

There was a case study in Houston, Texas regarding Gary Graham. The state accused Gary of murder, and no one had sufficient evidence that he shot another person. After sustaining evidence, they started to realize that they prosecuted an innocent man. The witnesses who testified could not identify who killed the woman. The only evidence that the Law Enforcement officers had was a picture of Gary and a line up which pointed out Graham.

Read More
841 Words | 4 Pages

That is reasonable suspicion. The Supreme Court's decision involved the fact that the officer had nothing but a feeling that the men were up to no good, and had a reasonable doubt that they were

Read More
1292 Words | 6 Pages

“The underlying premise of the Rule is that certain relevant evidence should not be admitted to the trier of fact where the admission would have an adverse impact upon the effectiveness or integrity of the fact finding process.” “Logically, all evidence presented by a prosecutor is prejudicial, but not all evidence unfairly prejudices a defendant. It is only the latter that Evid. R. 403 prohibits.” Evidence crosses the threshold of mere prejudice, and becomes unfair and therefore deserving of mandatory exclusion “if the evidence arouses the jury's emotional sympathies, evokes a sense of horror, or appeals to an instinct to punish, the evidence may be unfairly prejudicial.

Read More
285 Words | 2 Pages

The exclusionary rule can make evidence inadmissible in the court of law if that evidence was illegally obtained by a police officer. This protects an individual from unlawful searches and serves as an effective deterrent for police misconduct. One could argue that a mistake on the officer’s behalf should not result in the release of a criminal. This assertion would be reasonable if these fourth amendment violations committed by police officers were honest mistakes. Unfortunately, some illegal evidence is found because of deliberate misconduct by the police.

Read More
356 Words | 2 Pages

It would not deter a crooked dishonest cop. The rule is in place so that officers will not obtain evidence illegally and so that they would stop and consider their actions while investigating cases and to stop police misconduct. (The Exclusionary rule prevents the government from using evidence gathered in violation of the U.S. Constitution. (Cornell Law School, 1992). During the Weeks vs. The United States case the Supreme Court found that evidence seized by a federal agent had been obtained without a warrant or by other Constitutional

Read More
1163 Words | 5 Pages

In 1966, an influential court case occurred – one that would shape the United States to improve the justice system. Ernesto Miranda was accused for crimes and identified by the victim, after which he was then interrogated. Miranda orally confessed to a crime and signed a written confession; however, he did not request a lawyer, nor was he advised of his right to have one present. Due to the inadequate constitutionality of the situation, Miranda was able to challenge the Supreme Court in this conviction. The ruling in Miranda represents the fulfillment of the legal tradition of the promise of self-incrimination by offering protection in statements, reinforcing the Fifth Amendment, and the equity of suspects during interrogation.

Read More
804 Words | 4 Pages

This concern led to absence of expertise dependability on the part of the state. It was out of this failing that the state had a direct impact on the case. This aggravating conduct provides a superb outline for prospective courts, owing to the fact that the methodologies engaged by the FBI do not diverge considerably across circumstances. This exceedingly speculative testimony brings about concerns to the courts on the specifics that should be of concern in such

Read More
217 Words | 1 Pages

A man in Tampa gets shot by his cousin when he questioned whether or not his bulletproof vest would work against a bullet. 23-year-old Joaquin Mendez had put on his older bulletproof vest and asked out loud to himself whether or not it had still worked, and that is when his cousin Alexandro Garibaldi picked up a pistol and said "let's see" then fired at Mendez. According to the police, officers showed up to the scene about 10 p.m. on Sat and found Mendez lying on the ground outside the residence with a bullet wound. Garibaldi first told investigators that he had heard a gunshot and found his cousin outside who had been shot.

Read More
1392 Words | 6 Pages

Although in this case, Escobedo confessed his crime before his rights were stated to him, therefore, "... no statement extracted by the police during the interrogation may be used against him at a trial," (ESCOBEDO v. ILLINOIS) which caused his confession overthrown by the court. In addition, this case is interesting to me because I believe it was fascinating how the accused murderer, Escobedo, was able to get away with his crime simply because his Miranda Rights were not stated to him before he confessed and was denied his right to counsel which was the police department's

Read More
728 Words | 3 Pages

IV. ASSESSMENT OF CHARLOTTE BEERS Positive Results When Charlotte Beers presided as the CEO of O&M, she quickly recognized the agency’s situation in the market. As the company couldn’t adjust to the clients’ demands for low-cost services, global communications, and other integrated services, its revenues were in decline. There was low morale due to the hostile takeover. Many senior employees left the company, and due to lack of discipline, it negatively impacted the agency’s financial figures.

Read More
904 Words | 4 Pages

The general public is okay that some criminals go free if it means police will not violate the 4th amendment. The exclusionary rule states that any evidence obtained illegally shall not be used in the court of law. It also states any evidence found because of the piece of illegal evidence is invalid. The exclusionary rule was first introduced in federal courts with the case Weeks V USA 1919. The rule did not apply to the states until 1961 in Maps V Ohio when they stated it was arrogant to have a rule that only applies to federal courts.

Read More
493 Words | 2 Pages

The exclusionary rule is a lawful principle that the United States use, which expresses that the confirmation that was powerfully utilized by the police can 't be utilized in a criminal trial. The motivation behind why this is done it’s for the security of the established rights. In addition, the exclusionary rule states that in the Fifth Amendment no one "should be denied of life, freedom, or property without due procedure of law." The exclusionary rule additionally expresses that in the Fourth Amendment it is intended to shield residents from unlawful pursuits and seizures. It also applies to the infringement of the Sixth Amendment, which ensures the privilege to counsel.

Read More
427 Words | 2 Pages

Back in 1975, there was a major case called, Payton V. New York. Theodore Payton was suspected of murdering a gas station manager, they found evidence within his home that connected him with the crime. What caused the problem was the fact New York had a law that allowed unwarranted searches if the person was a suspect. Based off the oral argument presented by Oyez, the police said it didn't count as the evidence because it was in public view when entering the home. It had to be appealed before it was determined as unconstitutional.

Read More
1496 Words | 6 Pages

We were given wide discretion and told to follow our hunches. If we wanted to stop and search someone or some persons, we would stop and search. Any possible violations such as speeding, or improper equipment, were afterthoughts (Kocieniewski and Hanley).” The approval of law enforcements being taught how to profile someone can affect not only minorities but can alter that individuals beliefs for what is right. He continued testifying

Read More

More about Aguilar And Gates Case Essay

Related Topics

Open Document