Rochester Institute of Technology Name: Waqas Sikandari
Fall 2015 - 2016 Text:West’s Business Law, 13th ed. Instructor: Stephen E. LaGrou March 2016
Homework Assignment – Case Analysis People v Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181, 590 N.E.2d 204, 581 N.Y.S.2d 619 (1992) Directions: Read the above-mentioned case and answer all questions below. Follow all instructions. Type or print neatly. This assignment must be done individually. Retrieve the above-mentioned case using Westlaw and bring a copy of it, along with this handout, to class. The procedures described in this case apply generally to all agency enforcement actions. Think about how those procedures might have applied to Martha Stewart’s criminal case. Due Date: March 17, 2016, at beginning of class. Hardcopies Only – No E-mails. All papers for this assignment are to be stapled together as one document. Make a copy of the assignment to have in front of you as we discuss it in class. _____ 1. This case is the seminal (first) case establishing New York’s 4-tiered method for evaluating the propriety of encounters initiated by police officers in their criminal law enforcement capacity. (T/F) FALSE 2. Name the four levels of police intrusion that a police officer is authorized to exercise against a citizen, starting with the least intrusive level, and in ONE short sentence. Also, state the legal standard for the use of each (That is, state what the officer must prove in order to properly use each type of intrusion.). Name of lowest level of intrusion (Level 1) Request for information. Legal Standard: An objective credible reason, not indicative of criminality Name of next higher level of intrusion (Level 2): Common Law right of Inquiry Legal Standard: Founded Suspicion Name of next higher level of intrusion (Level 3): Stop and Frisk Legal Standard: Reasonable Suspicion
1
Name of highest level intrusion (Level 4): Arrest and Full Search Legal Standard: Probable Cause
_____ 3. a)
This case focuses mainly on The distinction between a request for information and a common law inquiry The distinction between a request for information and an arrest The distinction between a common law inquiry and an arrest
b) c) _____ 4.
This case is best described as involving the 4th Amendment / warrantless arrest 4th Amendment / arrest by warrant 5th Amendment / right to remain silent 6th Amendment / right to an attorney during police questioning
a) b) c) d) _____ 5.
In Hollman’s case, the request for information was proper. (T/F) True
_____ 6.
In Saunders’ case, the request for information was proper. (T/F) True
_____ 7.
In Hollman’s case, the common law inquiry was proper.
(T/F) True
_____ 8.
In Saunders’ case, the common law inquiry was proper.
(T/F) False
_____ 9. In addition to the issues cited above, this case also focuses on what a citizen must do in response to a police inquiry. (T/F) True _____ 10. a) b) c) d) _____ 11. a) b) c)
In Hollman’s case, the officer made a mistake in transitioning from a request for information to a common law inquiry a request for information to an arrest a common law inquiry to an arrest none of the above In Saunders’ case, the officer made a mistake in transitioning from a request for information to a common law inquiry a request for information to an arrest a common law inquiry to an arrest
2
d)
None of the above
_____ 12. According to Hollman, the four-part test used to analyze the propriety of a police encounter with a civilian is based squarely on the language of the State Constitution. False _____ 13. According to Hollman, the four-part test articulated in De Bour was not required by the State or Federal Constitution. False 14. Under federal law, what is the test for determining whether a police encounter with a civilian is sufficiently intrusive so as to trigger the protections of the Fourth Amendment? (Quote) Whether "a reasonable person would feel free 'to disregard the police and go about his business'" (Florida v Bostick, supra, at 2386, quoting California v Hodari D., supra, at 1551). If the civilian would feel free to go, "the encounter is consensual and * * * will not trigger Fourth Amendment scrutiny unless it loses its consensual nature" (Florida v Bostick, supra). When an officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude that criminal activity may be afoot, the officer may briefly stop the suspicious person and make reasonable inquiries aimed at confirming or dispelling the officer's suspicions . Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
15. According to Hollman, under New York law, what is the test for determining whether a police encounter with a civilian is sufficiently intrusive to trigger the protections provided in the DeBour 4-part test? (Quote) Police can request for information, supported by an objective credible reason, not necessarily indicative of criminality. In that case, two police officers walking their beat at 12:15 A.M. observed the defendant walking on the same side of the street in their direction. When the defendant came within 30 or 40 feet of the officers, he crossed the street. The officers followed him and asked him a series of questions. (People vs De Bour.)
_____ 16. Which test for determining the propriety of police encounters with civilians provides citizens with more protection?
3
a) b)
The federal test The New York State test
_____ 17. According to Hollman, the intrusion on the security and privacy of an individual is always a violation of the spirit of the Constitution. (T/F) False _____ 18. In Hollman, the People asked the court to overrule People v De Bour. Did the court do so? (Yes/No) NO _____ 19. a) b) 20.
De Bour represents State common law developed to protect implied constitutional rights State common law developed to protect express constitutional rights
Name the two Fourth Amendment rights that are being protected by De Bour?
Protection under Unreasonable searches and seizures.
21.
Under what circumstances are those rights protected?
(Quote)
When there is no probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.
_____ 22. Under Hollman, is it possible for the police to violate the Constitution during a civilian encounter even though a Fourth Amendment search and seizure has not been triggered? (Yes or No) No. The De Bour test applies even when Four Amendment search and seizure has not been triggered. _____ 23. Does the Hollman court agree with the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decisions holding that approaches which do not amount to seizures are not entitled to protection under the Fourth Amendment? (Yes or No) No
4
24. Hollman describes what a police officer is authorized to do when interacting with a citizen. However, the case does not specifically describe what the citizen is authorized to do in response. At what level(s), if any, must the citizen answer questions posed by the police? [You will probably have to do some legal research to answer these questions. However, you do not need to attach the cases that you find – just answer the questions below.] Level 1:
_____ must answer
_____ need not answer
(check one)
Level 2:
_____ must answer
_____ need not answer
(check one)
Level 3:
_____ must answer
_____ need not answer
(check one)
Level 4:
_____ must answer
_____ need not answer
(check one)
25. Suppose a police officer asks a citizen “What’s in your bag?” Under Hollman, this would be considered what level of intrusion by the officer? Level 2
26. Suppose a police officer sees a man running out of a bank with a bag and then sees a person come out after the man and yelling “Stop him – he just robbed the bank.” Under Hollman, what is the most that the officer would be authorized to do? That is, what is the highest level of intrusion would be proper? Level 1: Request for Information. The police officer has observed anything and is relying on the judgement of someone else. Also criminality is not a foot, yet. There are many possible scenarios of someone coming out of bank with a bag full of money.
27. Suppose a police officer is in a mall and he sees a man pull out a gun and start shooting people. Under Hollman, can the police officer go straight to level four – an arrest – or must he start at one of the lower levels of intrusion? Yes he can. There is a probable cause now.
5
28. Based on Hollman, can you be under arrest without ever being told that you are under arrest? (Yes/No) NO
6
