No Miranda Necessary
with William Bedsworth, Justice of the Court of Appeal, State of California
The Miranda advisement need not be given if the suspect is neither under
arrest nor under such significant restraint as to amount to the functional
equivalent of an arrest. In this case, a suspect’s statements made at the
police station were held admissible without an advisement because the
suspect was held not to be in custody. Justice Bedsworth explains how that
conclusion was reached and how this case may provide a useful interrogation
strategy. Case cited: United States v. Norris (2005 DJDAR 13244). (5:36)

The Latest on "Estes" Robberies
with Jeff Rubin, Alameda County District Attorney's Office
A robbery occurs when a suspect, with the intent to steal, uses force or fear
to take property from the immediate presence of the owner of the property.
This segment discusses cases upholding robbery convictions where the initial
taking occurred outside the victim’s immediate presence and without the use
of force or fear, but force or fear was later used to prevent recovery of the
property. Cases cited: People v. Gomez (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 1241;
People v. Estes (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 23. (8:29)

Vehicle Impounds: Community Caretaking Doctrine
with Daniel McNerney, Superior Court Judge, State of California
Under the “Community Caretaking” doctrine, police may impound a vehicle
and inventory its contents where the vehicle is impeding traffic or poses a
threat to public safety. Cases cited: Cady v. Dombrowski (1973) 413 U.S.
433; Miranda v. City of Cornelius (2006) DAR 13393. (6:01)

Searches Incident to Arrest: Contemporaneous Requirement
with Jeff Rubin, Alameda County District Attorney's Office
Pursuant to a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of a vehicle, an officer
may, “as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest,” search the passenger
compartment of the vehicle. Discusses cases involving various periods of
delay and different intervening events to explain when a search incident to
arrest will be deemed contemporaneous. Cases cited: United States v.
Weaver (9th Cir. 2006) 433 F.3d 1104; United States v. McLaughlin (9th
Cir.1999) 170 F.3d 889; United States v. Ramos-Oseguera (9th Cir.1997)
120 F.3d 1028; United States v. Vasey (9th Cir.1987) 834 F.2d 782. (7:05)

Bad Checks Or Not?
with William Bedsworth, Justice of the Court of Appeal, State of California
California Penal Code §476a makes it illegal to write a check without
“sufficient funds in or credit with” the bank upon which a check is drawn.
Does a check guarantee card qualify as “credit with” the bank that issues it?
And what if the check-writer exceeds the amount of the guarantee? Doesn’t
that expose him/her to a 476a liability? Not according to the 9th Circuit Court
of Appeal. This is a critical decision for everyone who ever sees a 476a.
Case cited: Goldyn v. Hayes (2006) DJDAR 1399 (2/2/06). (7:36)

Grand Theft: Taking From the Person
with Jeff Rubin, Alameda County District Attorney's Office
What would otherwise be a petty theft is converted into a grand theft if the
suspect takes the property from the “person” of the victim. This video
discusses various cases explaining what it means to take property from the
“person” of another. Cases/Statute cited: In re Jesus O. (2006) 135
Cal.App.4th 237; In re Eduardo D. (2001) 81 Cal.App.4th 545; In re George
B. (1991) 228 U.S. 1088; People v. Huggins (1997) 51 Cal.App.4th 1654;
People v. Williams (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1465; People v. McGrath (1976) 62
Cal.App.3d 82; People v. Smith (1968) 278 Cal.App.2d 117; People v.
McElroy (1897) 116 Cal. 583; Pen. Code § 487. (10:42)