due process tg - constitutional rights foundation

_____________________________________________________________________________

The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Due Process

2

�

The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Due Process and

California v. Greenwood: A U.S. Supreme Court Case �

�

�

Developed by Marshall Croddy

Written by Keri Doggett & Bill Hayes

Graphic Design by Keri Doggett

Todd Clark Executive Director

Constitutional Rights Foundation

601 South Kingsley Drive Los Angeles, CA 90005

(213) 487-5590 (213) 386-0459 Fax

www.crf-usa.org

�

© 2003

3

The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Due Process and

California v. Greenwood: A U.S. Supreme Court Case Overview This PowerPoint lesson contains two presentations: The Constitution and the Bill of Rights: Due Process and California v. Greenwood: A Supreme Court Case. The lesson begins with The Constitution and Bill of Rights: Due Process presentation to introduce and provide background on the concept of due process. Using animated graphics, this presentation provides a visual medium to accompany the teacher’s oral narrative. It is designed to provide flexibility for teachers to focus on key concepts most appropriate for their courses and students. The PowerPoint lesson also includes a moot court activity, California v.Greenwood: A Supreme Court Case. In this activity, students apply their knowledge about due process as they prepare for and present a mini-moot court case. The California v.Greenwood PowerPoint presentation provides graphics and sound effects. The talking points for this presentation provide teachers with procedures for conducting the activity using the slides as cues for the students. Getting Started 1. Place the CD in the CD reader of your computer.

2. This presentation was developed using PowerPoint 97. If PowerPoint isn't already

running on your computer, launch it now.

3. In PowerPoint click on File and then Open from the menu bar.

4. Navigate to the drive assigned to the CD reader. The two presentations will be listed in the Open dialog box (Due Process.ppt and Greenwood.ppt).

5. Select the presentation you want to open and double click or click on Open in the dialog box to open your selection.

6. Once the presentation is opened, click on Slide Show and then View Show on the menu bar to start the presentation.

4

Suggested Presentation Strategy 1. Preview the two presentations: The Constitution and the Bill of Rights: Due Process and

California v. Greenwood: A Supreme Court Case and review the talking points for each. 2. Prepare a narrative presentation to accompany The Constitution and the Bill of Rights:

Due Process based on your course of study and student needs. You may want to provide additional depth on specific topics.

3. Following the presentation, explain to students that they are going to have a chance to

participate as attorneys and justices in a Supreme Court case. 4. Using PowerPoint, guide students through the activity, California v. Greenwood. Step-

by-step procedures are included in the talking points on pages A1. Tips for Conducting a Moot Court Activity

The quickest and easiest method for assigning roles is to leave the students seated where they are and divide the room into three sections, with the students sitting in each section taking one of the roles: justices, attorneys for the appellant, attorneys for the respondent. Counting off by 3s is another quick method, but the students will have to physically regroup. If you choose to use the Participatory Method described below, the class will need to be divided into groups of seven students each. Two methods for conducting the moot court activity: A. Time-Efficient Method

Students work with others within their attorney/justice groups to prepare for the case. A few minutes before the moot court is to start, the teacher asks each group to select a team of attorneys and justices to present the case in front of the class. After the presentation and decision, the teacher asks the other student attorneys what arguments they might have included, and the other justices how they might have decided the case differently.

B. Participatory Method

Divide the class into groups of seven students. Within each group, assign three students to play justices, two will be attorneys for the appellant, and two will be attorneys for the respondent. All of the justices, and each set of attorneys then regroup to help each other prepare and work with any outside resource people available.

5

When it is time for the courts to be in session, the students return to their original groups of seven and present the case. Each set of justices deliberates and decides its own case. Then each set shares its decision and rationale with the rest of the class. The students who were attorneys discuss the most compelling and weakest arguments they think they made.

Enrichment Strategies A. After students have participated in the presentations, assign small groups to write their

own narratives for a set of slides. Arrange for students to make presentations to other classes.

B. Divide students into small groups and assign one of the due-process amendments to each

group. Ask students to create a short presentation to: 1. Explain the amendment.

2. Provide an example to demonstrate a contemporary application of the protections afforded by the amendment. (Older students could find recent court cases for the amendments.)

C. Have students research and report on how one of the following cases affected due-

process rights: • Illinois v. Wardlow (2000) (stop and frisk) • Terry v. Ohio (1968) (stop and frisk) • U.S. v. Ross (1982) (vehicle searches) • Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) (defense counsel for felonies) • Mapp v. Ohio (1961) (unreasonable search) • Miranda v. Arizona (1966) (Miranda rights read)

6

Standards Connections The Constitution and the Bill of Rights supports U.S. history standards addressing constitutional heritage, federalism, and civic values and rights. With the addition of the California v. Greenwood activity, the lesson supports critical-thinking, cooperative-learning, and decision-making skills. Sample Standards Connections:

Understands the significance of the Bill of Rights and its specific guarantees (e.g., the relevance of the Bill of Rights in today's society). (National Civics) Gain understanding about the people and events associated with the development of the U.S. Constitution and its significance as the foundation of the American republic. (CA History 5.7)

Understand the foundation of the American political system and the ways in which citizens participate in it. (CA History 8.3) Analyze significant events in the founding of the nation and its attempts to realize the philosophy of government described in the Declaration of Independence. (CA History 11.1) Understands the role and importance of law in the American constitutional system and issues regarding the judicial protection of individual rights. (National Civics)

Understands the basic concept of due process of law (i.e., government must use fair procedures to gather information and make decisions in order to protect the rights of individuals and the interests of society). (National Civics) Understands the importance to individuals and to society of major due process protections such as habeas corpus, presumption of innocence, fair notice, impartial tribunal, speedy and public trials, right to counsel, trial by jury, right against self incrimination, protection against double jeopardy, right of appeal. (National Civics)

1

The Courts, the

Constitution, and

the Bill of Rights:

Due Process

© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles.

All rights reserved.

2

What if on tonight’s news you learned that…

Several new laws have been passed. These laws give the police and the courts more power to find, catch, and

prosecute people who might be criminals.

Click 1: What if…

Click 2: Several new laws…

Click to next slide.

3

Police and soldiers can enter and search homes and businesses

whenever they want.

The new laws say that ...

The police

and post office

employees may open

and read any mail they

think might be interesting.

The new laws allow people to be searched…completely…if they look suspicious.

On slide: The New Laws…

The police and post office...

Click 1: Graphic + Police and soldiers can enter...

Click 2: The new laws allow people...

Elaboration: Briefly discuss each rule to ensure understanding.


4

From now on, Americans who look like they might be breaking the law will be treated as if they are guilty until they are proven innocent.

One judge will decide if a person is innocent or guilty. The decision will be final.

There will be no lawyers. There will be no jury.

On slide: From now on…

One judge will...

Click 1: There will be no lawyers...

Elaboration: Briefly discuss each rule to ensure understanding.


5

How would you like

these new laws?

Booo! Hisss!

Yuck.

On slide: Graphic

Click 1: How would you like these…

Elaboration: Conduct a short discussion using the question. Lead students to recognize negative aspects of the hypothetical laws.


6

No need to worry. This could not happen today. All of these laws are now

UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

The United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights protect our individual rights and freedoms.

On slide: All words and graphics.

(“Unconstitutional” spins for a few seconds.)


7

When the founders of our nation created the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they wanted to try to make sure that people, even those accused of a

crime, would be treated fairly.

They used ideas from English Common Law, like people are innocent until proven guilty.

On slide: All text and graphics.

Elaboration: Ask students what they think “innocent until proven guilty” means. If the students have recently studied the American Revolution, you might ask them why the founders were so concerned about making sure people would be treated fairly by the new government. (They should describe some of the injustices the Americans felt the British committed.)


8

The Bill of Rights includes several

amendments that protect citizens from

unfair treatment by the government, including

judges and police. These amendments

ensure “due process.”

To the Constitution, the founders added a Bill of Rights. This list of 10 amendments was created to make sure that individual rights and freedoms would be protected.

Bill of Rights

On slide: All words and graphics.

Elaboration: Ask the students what they think “due process” means. Ask if they have ever heard anyone say, “he’ll get his due” or “she’ll get what she’s due one of these days.” The term “due process” means getting one’s “due,” or what’s fair.


9

4th AmendmentProtects against unreasonable searches and seizures of...

persons,houses,

papers,and effects.

On slide: 4th Amendment

Protects against…

persons,

Click 1: crowd graphic

Click 2: houses + house graphic

Click 3: papers + desk, files graphic

Click 4: and effects + graphics

Elaboration: Expand on the four categories named on slide; discuss “unreasonable” searches.

FYI…4th Amendment cases:

Mapp v. Ohio (1961) set the exclusionary rule. Reasons for the rule: Judicial integrity (courts should not condone illegal acts) and deterrence (keep police from violating rights).

Katz v. U.S. (1967) defined a search as a government intrusion into something that person has a “reasonable expectation of privacy.”


10

No double jeopardy.Due process of law. Just compensation.

Don’t have to testify against yourself.

5th Amendment

The 5th and 6th Amendments protect the rights of the accused in court.

On Slide: The 5th and 6th Amendments…

5th Amendment

Click 1: Courtroom drops in.

No double jeopardy and other text under 5th A. shows.

Elaboration: Discuss “taking the Fifth.”

Define “double jeopardy.”

Define “due process” as basic fairness. Explain that in a criminal case, due process includes the presumption of innocence and the requirement that the state must prove its

case beyond a reasonable doubt.

FYI...Fifth Amendment cases:

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) held that prior to questioning a suspect in custody, police must warn the suspect of his or her rights.

In re Gault (1967) ruled that juveniles have these due process rights in juvenile court—to know charges, to have an attorney, to question accusers, to remain silent.


11

6th Amendment

Speedy, public trial. Impartial jury.Informed of accusation. Right to an attorney.Witnesses:

Confront those against you.Have your own.

On slide: All text and graphic.

Elaboration: Ensure students understand the listed elements of the 6th Amendment.

FYI...6th Amendment cases:

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) held that every person tried for a felony has a right toa lawyer, and if the person cannot afford one, the state must provide the lawyer.

Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) held that a person in custody is entitled to have a lawyer present during police questioning.


12

14th Amendment (1868)

States must…Treat all people equally under the law.Provide due process of law. Protect the basic liberties spelled out in the U.S. Constitution.

8th Amendment

No excessive bail or fines.

No cruel or unusual punishment.

On slide: 8th Amendment

No excessive…

No cruel or unusual…

Click 1: Scorpion and boiling pot graphics.

Click 2; 14th Amendment text + graphic.

FYI...8th Amendment cases:

The 8th Amendment does not spell out what cruel or unusual punishments are. Trop v. Dulles (1955) stated that the 8th Amendment “must draw its meaning from evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.”

Gregg v. Georgia (1976) upheld the death penalty as constitutional if strict guidelines were followed.

14th Amendment cases:

Palko v. Connecticut (1937) ruled that the 14th Amendment’s due process clause incorporates fundamental liberties “rooted in the tradition and conscience of our people.”


13

The words of these amendments have not changed, but the way the courts

interpret them has. Over the last 200 years our due process rights have

become stronger.



14

In the 1960s the courts made several rulings that expanded our due process protections.

Before this time…

The police did not have to “read you your rights” before interrogating you.

If you could not afford an attorney…

If the police searched your house without a warrant, you might be able to file a complaint and sue the police, but the evidence they found could still be

used against you in court.

too bad.

On slide: In the 1960’s…

Click 1: If the police… + graphic.

Click 2: The police did not have to…

Click 3: If you could not afford…

Click 4: too bad. + jail graphic.

Elaboration: Key cases expanding due process rights in the 1960s:

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Held that any interrogation of suspects in custody is unconstitutional unless police clearly tell suspects that they have right to remain silent, what they say can be used against them in court, they have a right to a lawyer, and if they cannot affordable one, a court will appoint one.

Exclusionary Rule (1961) No illegally obtained evidence may be used in court. From 1914 to 1961, the rule only applied to Federal courts. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) made the exclusionary rule apply to states.

(In 1960, the year prior to the Mapp decision, no search warrants were applied for by NYC police. During the year after Mapp, over 800 warrants were requested.)

Gideon v. Wainright (1963) extended providing defense council for indigents accused of felonies. Prior to that, applied only death penalty cases.


15

Society changes over time, and so does the way judges interpret the law.

It is up to the courts to uphold the Constitution and

the Bill of Rights.

The courts look at a given case and decide whether

someone accused of a crime received due process.

The First Chief Justices

On slide: Graphic + caption.

Click 1: Society changes…

Click 2: The courts look at...


16

There are two types of court—trial and appeals courts.

Cases begin in trial courts.In a trial court . . .

One judge presides.

Lawyers present evidence.

The evidence comes from witnesses, whom lawyers examine and cross-examine.

A jury hears the evidence and gives a verdict.

On slide: There are two types…

In a trial court…

Click 1: One judge… + graphic.

Click 2: Lawyers present… + graphic.

Click 3: The evidence comes… + graphic.

Click 4: A jury hears… + graphic.


17

The appeal must claim that there was an error of law. For example, the claim could be that . . .

After the trial, the defendant may appeal the case.

The judge made a mistake instructing the jury.

The judge allowed evidence that should not have been let in.

A law is unconstitutional.

We’re

confused.

On slide: After the trial…

The appeal must claim…

Click 1: The judge made a mistake… + jury graphic.

Click 2: The judge allowed evidence… + smoking gun graphic.

Click 3: A law is… + graphic.

Elaboration: Ensure that students understand people cannot appeal a case simply because they don’t like the outcome.


18

The appeals court is different from a trial court.

It does not hold a trial. No evidence is introduced.

A panel of justices hears the appeal.

Lawyers on each side present arguments orally and in written briefs. They use prior court cases and existing laws to prove their cases.

After the oral arguments, the justices leave the courtroom to discuss the case.

Then they vote.

On Slide: The appeals court…

Click 1: It does not hold… + graphic.

Click 2: Lawyers on each side… + graphic.

Click 3: After the oral arguments… + graphic.

Click 4: Then they vote…


19

One justice writes the opinion of the court.

It tells the facts of the case, the decision, and the reasons for the decision.

If a justice disagrees with the decision, he or she may write a dissenting opinion.

The written opinions of the court become law for the lower courts to follow.


Elaboration: Ensure that students understand that court rulings become “law.”If appropriate, explain “precedents.”


20

You are going to become Supreme Court justices. You will hear and decide a case dealing with a due

process issue.

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. Its decisions cannot be appealed. Only the

Supreme Court can overturn its own decisions.

On Slide: The United States Supreme… + graphic.

Click 1: You are going to become…


21

The End

Discussion Questions:

1. What is the purpose of the Constitution? The Bill of Rights?

2. What is “due process”?

3. Why do you think due process is important?

Transition to activity: California v. Greenwood.

Tell students that they are going have a chance to take part in a court simulation.

22

© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles

All rights reserved..

Designed by Marshall Croddy


Graphic Design and Production by Keri Doggett

The Courts, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights: Due Process

Special thanks to John Kronstadt, member of CRF Board of Directors, for inspiration and input.

1

California v. Greenwood

A Supreme Court Case

© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles, CA All rights reserved.

2

Are there things you throw away that you and your family would not like everyone to see?

How about . . .

Photos

Receipts

Notes home from teachers

Computer disks

Underwear

Think about this question:

Love letters

On slide: Are there things you throw…

Click 1: How about…

Click 2: Love letters + graphic.

Click 3: Receipts + graphic.

Click 4: Notes home… + graphic.

Click 5: Computer disks + graphic.

Click 6: Underwear + graphic.

Click 7: Photos + graphic.

1. Ask: What else might people throw away that they wouldn’t want others to see?

2. Explain: The case of California v. Greenwood was about trash and the issue of privacy.


3

You are going to work on a case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court. The name of the case is

California v. Greenwood.

The police had collected most of the evidence against Greenwood from dark green plastic trash bags (the kind you can’t see through).

Here are the facts:

In 1984, Billy Greenwood was arrested in California on felony narcotics charges. He was tried in Superior Court and convicted.

Guilty!

On slide: You are going to…

Click 1: Here are the facts + In 1984… + graphic.

Click 2: The police had… + graphic.


4

Greenwood had left the bags out for the trash collector. They sat on the curb in front of his house.

The police did not have a search warrant. But they did get permission from the trash collector to look through Greenwood’s trash bags.

On slide: Blue background.

Click 1: Greenwood had left… + truck drives in

Click 2: The police did not…


5

“probable cause,” or a reason to suspect, that a person has committed a crime,

or a search warrant.

The police had none of these.

Under the Fourth Amendment, to conduct a search, police need...

“consent,” or permission, from the person or property owner,

On slide: Under the Fourth Amendment…

Click 1: “probable cause,”…

Click 2: “consent,”…

Click 3: or a search warrant.

Click 4: The police had....

1. Ask:

What was Billy Greenwood convicted of?

Where did the police find most of the evidence?

Where were the trash bags located?

What do the police need to conduct a legal search?

What do you suppose happened next?


6

Greenwood’s lawyers appealed his conviction.

They argued that the police had no right to search the trash bags.

Therefore the evidence from the trash bags should not have been admitted at the trial.

On slide: All text and trash graphic.

Click 1: Access denied sound effect + graphic.


7

Both sides presented oral arguments and

briefs to the appeals courts.

Police did not conduct a “search” as defined by law. A search is a governmental intrusion into something in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Greenwood had thrown away the evidence. He had no reasonable expectation of privacy in trash bags left on the curb for the trash collector.

Attorneys for the state of California presented this argument:

Therefore the police did not conduct a search.

On slide: Both sides…

Attorneys for the state…

Click 1: Police did not…

Click 2: Greenwood had thrown…

Click 3: Therefore the police…


8

Therefore the police did conduct a search, which they had no right to do.

Greenwood’s lawyers presented this argument to the appeals court:

Greenwood did have a reasonable expectation of privacy of these bags.

On slide: Greenwood’s lawyers…

Click 1: Greenwood did have…

Click 2: Therefore the police…


9

The case went through the appeals process.

So the state of California appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The state then appealed to the California Supreme Court.

First, it went to the California Court of Appeals.

This court ruled in favor of Greenwood.

This court also ruled in favor of Greenwood.

Winner

Winner

On slide: The case went through…

Click 1: (from bottom) First, it went to the California Court of Appeals.+ graphic

Click 2: This court ruled in favor of Greenwood. + “winner” graphic.

Click 3: The state then appealed… + graphic.

Click 4: This court also ruled… + “winner” graphic.

Click 5: So the state of California… + graphic.

1. Ask:

What arguments did Greenwood’s attorneys make?

What arguments did the state of California make?

Which side won in the state appellate courts?

Who appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court?


10

The U.S. Supreme Court had to decide these questions:

You are going to take the case to the Supreme Court.

• Was it a search?

• Did Greenwood have a reasonable expectation that his trash would remain private?

On slide: Blue background

Click 1: You are going to take…

Click 2: The U.S. Supreme Court..

Click 3: Was it a search? + Did Greenwood…

Ensure that students understand the questions.


11

Attorneys for Greenwood.

Attorneys for the state of California.

Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.

You will take the roles of:

On slide: You will take...

Click 1: Justices… + graphic.

Click 2: Attorneys for the state… + graphic.

Click 3: Attorneys for Greenwood. + graphic.

PAUSE to get students into groups.

1. Divide the class into three sections. Assign each section one of the roles:

Justices

Attorneys for California

Attorneys for Greenwood

2. Distribute Handout 1 to each student and explain that each group will work together to prepare to present the case of California v. Greenwood.


12

To prepare for the case...

Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court: Create at least three questions to ask each side to help you determine the case.

Attorneys for the state of California: Create arguments that Greenwood had no reasonable expectation of privacy. The trash bags could be searched legally.

Attorneys for Greenwood: Create arguments to convince the justices that Greenwood had a reasonable expectation of privacy. The trash bags should not have been searched.

Decide who will represent your group to perform the moot court.

On slide: All text.

PAUSE to assign tasks:

1. As you present the instructions for each group, ask the students if they have questions.

2. Review the questions before the court and remind students that the case should focus on these issues.

3. Tell the students how much time they have to prepare their arguments and questions. Circulate among the groups and help them prepare.

When the groups are almost finished preparing, click to next slide.

13

Rules for the Oral Argument

1. Attorneys for the state of California will present first.

2. Attorneys for Greenwood will present second.

3. Justices will ask questions of both sides during the

arguments.

The Justices’ Decision

1. After oral arguments, the justices meet and discuss the

case.

2. Then they vote.

3. The justices will explain the reasons for the decision.

On slide: All text.

PAUSE to provide final preparation time (3 minutes) and conduct moot courts.

1. After the students have had time to prepare, present the Rules for Oral Argument.

2. Explain that the state of California presents first because the state is the party appealing the case from the lower court.

3. Have each side choose two or three people to make its presentation. Give each side a set amount of time for the presentation, e.g. 2 minutes. Don’t count as part of the 2 minutes the time each takes to answer questions from judges.

3. After the oral arguments, ask the justices to discuss, out loud, their thoughts about the case. Explain that this is always done behind closed doors, but that you are interested in hearing their rationale.

4. Ask the justices to take a vote.

5. Ask the rest of the class if they agree or disagree with the decision. Ask students to give reasons why.

After the justices have decided, click to next slide.

14

The Decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in

California v. Greenwood (1988)

The court found in favor of California.

Writing the opinion of the court, Justice Byron White said:

“. . . plastic garbage bags left . . . at the side of a public street

are readily accessible to animals, children, scavengers, snoops,

and other members of the public . . . . Moreover, [Greenwood]

placed . . . . refuse for the express purpose of [giving] it to . . .

the trash collector . . . . [Greenwood] could have no reasonable

expectation of privacy in the . . . items . . . discarded.”

On slide: The Decision…

Click 1: The court found… + decision.

1. Share the actual Supreme Court decision and dissent (next slide) with the class.

15

“Society [should be prepared] to recognize as reasonable an

individual’s expectation of privacy in the most private of

personal effects sealed in an opaque container and

disposed . . . [so as] to commingle it . . . with the trash of

others. . . . The mere possibility that unwelcome meddlers

might open and rummage through the containers does not

negate the expectation of privacy in its contents any more

than the possibility of a burglary negates the expectation of

privacy in a home . . . .”

Writing in dissent, Justice William Brennan said:

How do you think the case should have been decided?

On slide: All text.

1. Compare the arguments the students made with the actual decision and dissent.

2. Congratulate the students on their participation.

16

© 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles, CA

All rights reserved..

Designed by Marshall Croddy


Graphic Design and Production by Keri Doggett

California v.Greenwood : A Supreme Court Case

Special thanks to John Kronstadt, member of CRF Board of Directors, for inspiration and input.

due process tg - constitutional rights foundation

Documents