In American criminal law, the concept of “probable cause” serves as a cornerstone of the law protecting citizens from arbitrary arrests and unwarranted governmental intrusions. This constitutional safeguard, embedded within the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, establishes the legal standard for arrests, searches, and seizures.
Probable cause is one of the most powerful concepts in the work of an effective criminal defense lawyer. At Stechschulte Nell, Attorneys at Law, we know that the lack of probable cause to support a search warrant can destroy a prosecutor’s case and free a defendant. This article explains the concept of probable cause, its application in various legal scenarios, and its integral role in American criminal trials.
What Constitutes Probable Cause?
The term “probable cause” is often thought of as evidence or facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime has been, is being, or will be committed. However, it is not synonymous with absolute certainty or ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ the standard required for criminal convictions.
Probable cause operates within an environment of reasonable suspicion and objectivity. It is a flexible standard that varies depending on the circumstances but aims to limit governmental power by requiring the existence of legitimate evidence before government law enforcement officers can intrude into and search an area in which an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Probable Cause in Arrests and Searches
Before law enforcement officers can arrest someone, they must have probable cause to believe that the individual has committed a crime. Similarly, searches of homes, vehicles, and personal effects also generally require probable cause, unless specific exceptions apply.
If an officer obtains consent from a motorist or a resident to search their car or home, then no probable cause is required. Any evidence of a crime discovered during a search consented to by an authorized person might be used by prosecutors in court.
If a motorist is arrested after being pulled over in a traffic stop, the police can order the car towed from the location to keep the vehicle and the roadway safe. However, before having the vehicle towed, the law usually allows the officer to conduct “an inventory search” to safeguard anything of value for the motorist. Of course, this search may turn up evidence of a crime, drugs, a illegally possessed gun, etc.
The same motorist’s person can be searched without probable cause to ensure they have no weapons and to inventory their belongings during processing as part of their detention in police custody.
Warrants and Judicial Oversight
The Fourth Amendment explicitly states that “no Warrants shall be issued, but upon probable cause.” Law enforcement agencies present evidence to a neutral magistrate or judge, in the form of an affidavit sworn under oath, to obtain search or arrest warrants. This judicial oversight ensures an independent review of the facts, thereby serving as a check against arbitrary or abusive governmental actions.
But what does a judge look for when assessing whether a police affidavit contains enough facts and evidence to meet the probable cause standard? The judge will look for the inclusion of information based on reliable sources, including but not limited to some of the following:
Factors for Determining Probable Cause
- Direct Observations: Law enforcement officers can rely on what they personally observe, such as witnessing an act that is a clear violation of the law.
- Circumstantial Evidence: In the absence of direct observation, circumstantial evidence can be sufficient. For instance, if someone is found carrying burglary tools late at night near a building that shows signs of forced entry, these circumstances could establish probable cause.
- Informant Tips: Tips from informants can be a basis for probable cause, although their reliability and credibility must be scrutinized. Multiple corroborating tips from reliable sources will strengthen the case for probable cause.
- Expertise of Law Enforcement: The training and experience of law enforcement officers can sometimes contribute to the assessment of probable cause. For example, judges sometimes accept an officer’s report of a suspect’s specific conduct or patterns that may be recognized as indicative of criminal activity due to an officer’s training.
- Corroboration: Independently corroborating even minor aspects of an informant tip or observed activity can provide sufficient grounds for probable cause.
Probable Cause and Exclusionary Rule
The doctrine of probable cause has a direct bearing on the admissibility of evidence in criminal trials through the “exclusionary rule.” Evidence obtained in violation of an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights will usually be barred from use against them in a criminal trial. If law enforcement conducts a search or seizure without sufficient probable cause, a skilled defense lawyer will file a motion to suppress the illegally obtained evidence, which can sometimes result in the dismissal of charges if the suppressed evidence is central to the prosecution’s case.
In many cases, evidence that police find during an illegal search (one not supported by probable cause) will lead police to other evidence located elsewhere. If the original search is deemed by the court to have lacked probable cause, both the original search evidence and the subsequent search evidence will all be inadmissible in court. The law considers the illegally seized secondary evidence as “fruit of the poisonous tree.”
Legal Defenses and Challenges
Probable cause can be contested in several ways during criminal proceedings. Defense attorneys often challenge the reliability of the informants, question the objectivity of the police officers involved, or argue that the circumstances did not merit a reasonable belief that a crime was committed. Successful challenges to the establishment of probable cause can destroy a prosecution’s case, leading to charges being dropped or trials resulting in acquittals.
Probable Cause Must Support a Criminal Charge
Even when a criminal prosecution involves no searches or seized evidence, probable cause must still exist for the charge to be prosecuted in a court of law. If a witness will testify to a defendant’s illegal conduct, or if other presumably reliable evidence supports the charge, then the case may proceed.
However, if a prosecution involves charges of embezzlement, for example, and the available evidence equally indicates that any one of three people could have committed the offense, there is no probable cause to sustain a charge against one of those individuals without more particularized evidence.
Skilled Criminal Defense Lawyers Are Masters of Probable Cause Law
The measure of probable cause is flexible and very fact-dependent, varying from one case to another. The definition of probable cause is simple, but the application of it to individual fact patterns involves intricate nuances that only become clear after years of deep study and courtroom practice. Experienced criminal defense lawyers, like those at Stechschulte Nell in Tampa, use probable cause law to protect and defend their clients every day.
If you’re facing legal challenges and need expert guidance on matters of probable cause, don’t hesitate to reach out to the seasoned criminal defense lawyers at Stechschulte Nell in Tampa. Our team has the experience and knowledge to protect your rights effectively.
Call us today at 813-280-1244 to schedule a consultation and ensure your defense is in capable hands.
