Physical Evidence List and Explain Five (5)

Physical Evidence

List and explain five (5) ways that show how authentication or identification of physical evidence can be accomplished (also called "laying the foundation").

Authentication of physical evidence can be accomplished by:

Testimony of a witness who has first-hand knowledge. This is enough for authentication if the person involved has personal diligence that a matter is what is claimed to be.

A non-expert person who must have been well-acquainted with the specimen and did not acquire the knowledge for the purpose of betrayal, such as a spouse or roommate.

Allowing the jury or an expert to put in comparison the evidence purported with the specimens which have been authenticated is enough for authentication.

Distinctive qualities and associated circumstances such as sending a bill to a particular address and getting payment from the bill or other appearance, contents, substance, as well as other internal design qualities when admitted together with associated circumstances, is authentication of evidence.

5. Positive voice identification through a mechanical or electronic transmission such a recording device. A voice recording is sufficiently identified based upon hearing the voice under circumstances associating it with the presented evidence.

B. List and explain six (6) ways that photographic, recorded, and computer generated evidence can be used in a trial.

1. Telephone conversations. Evidence that a call was made to a particular number assigned at the time by the telephone company, and the details of that call such as time length of call and content are available for verification.

2. Public records or reports. Evidence of recorded writing or filed in a public office, or a purported public record, report, statement, or data compilation, in any form, from a public office where this type of items are stored.

3. Ancient documents or data compilation. The evidence that a document or information in any form has existed for more than 20 years or is in such condition that will not raise any suspicion concerning its authenticity at the time of submission.

4. Processor system. This evidence explaining a procedure or system applied in achieving results must be shown before its approval.

5. Methods provided by statute or rule. This includes any system of authentication outlined by an Act of Congress or as stipulated by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority.

6. Photo identification. The most important aspect about photographs or videotapes is their ability to provide testimony clearly verifying the authenticity of the situation shown by them.

2. Miranda

State the requirements for Miranda, then define custody and interrogation as each relates to Miranda.

Miranda is the application of testimonial evidence in criminal proceeding and is a product of custodial police interrogation. Therefore, for Miranda to apply, six factors must be present:

First, testimonial evidence must have been gathered during the period in custody or interrogation for Miranda rule to apply. Second, the evidence gathered during the time in custody or interrogation must be testimonial. Third, the evidence collected must have been the product of interrogation. Forth, the evidence gathered during custody must be submitted by the state during a criminal prosecution.

List and explain the three (3) exceptions to the Miranda requirements.

1. The exception of the routine booking questions. These are procedural questions asked during arrest and custodial commitments. They are not considered under Miranda because they are unlikely to produce incriminating information.

2. The exception of a jail house informant testimony. In case the suspect fails to recognize a state informant pretending to be a fellow inmate, a cellmate working as an agent for the state, the incriminating testimony is inadmissible.

3. The exception on public safety. This is a condition when information presenting clear and present is offered and the officers have reason to believe that the suspect has information that can end the emergency.

3. Exclusionary Rule

Creation and Purposes of Exclusionary Rule

The exclusionary rule is a legal principle under the constitutional law which states that any evidence obtained under circumstance that violates the defendant's rights is inadmissible in criminal proceedings in a court of law. This is rule was formulated by the judiciary to protect citizen's constitutional rights. If the prosecutor applies illegal means to gain incriminating evidence, the evidence can be thrown out by the jury. The rule also gives defendants the right not to explain whether the crime was actually committed. This rule applies to all persons within the United States whether citizens, immigrants; legal or illegal and visitors (Dressler, 2002).

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine

According to S.Bransdorfer (1987), the fruit of the poisonous tree is legality in the United States describing illegally obtained evidence. The logic behind this term is that the source of the evidence is tainted, so is anything gained from it; fruit is tainted as well. This is an extension of the exclusionary rule, meant to prevent evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment from being admitted into a criminal trial. The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is meant to discourage the police from obtaining evidence illegally. However this rule is subjected to exceptions if the search for the evidence was not based on probable cause and was executed by government agents in good faith.

Independent source doctrine

The independent source doctrine is consistent with the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. The independent doctrine allows admission of evidence collected by means independent of any constitutional violation. The doctrine allows submission of evidence initially discovered in an illegal process but later obtained independently from legal nativities' free from initial illegalities.

4. Search and Seizure

Warrant Requirement

It is required that a warrant application be supported a detailed statement sworn by a law enforcement officer before an impartial magistrate. The officer must give reasonable and tangible reasoning and caution to believe that the offense is already been committed.

In addition, the arrest warrants must be supported by probable causes given by the officer requiring the description of the suspect and residence location. It must also describe the individuals in detail for easy identification, so that persons with average intelligence can distinguish them from the general population (Gaines & Miller, 2006)

Six warrant requirement exceptions

1. Search incident to lawful arrest. An officer does not require a warrant for a search to lawful arrest. The officer may search the person and the surrounding area within the reach of the suspect at the time of the search.

2. The plain view exception. A laws enforcement officer does not require an arrest warrant to seize and search evidence within the location from which they can clearly view the evidence.

3. Consent. Consent to search and seize evidence may be given by an individual genuinely believed by the arresting police officer to have authority to give the consent. This consent allows search without arrest warrant as long as it is not a violation of the suspect's Fourth amendment rights.