Discovery, Discovery, Discovery
with William W. Bedsworth, Appellate Court Justice, State of California
Federal prosecutors obtained a conviction of a United States senator for
corruption in office. It was a historic and impressive accomplishment, which
has now been vacated by the Justice Department. The prosecutors are being
investigated for contempt of court and could likely lose their licenses to
practice even if they avert criminal charges. Justice Bedsworth explains why
this case is significant for all law enforcement officers. Case cited: U.S. v.
Stevens. (7:39)

Boxcutter With Exposed Blade Prohibited at School
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
A box cutter with the blade exposed qualifies as a “a razor with an
unguarded blade” for purposes of P.C. Section 626.10, the statute prohibiting
the possession of such an item on school grounds. This holds true even if the
box cutter is in a backpack, although not if the blade of the box cutter is
retracted. Cases/Statute Cited: In re Z.R. (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1510; In
re Michael R. (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 1203; Pen. Code § 626.10. (3:06)

Miranda: Juveniles and Voluntariness
with Daniel McNerney, Superior Court Judge, Orange County, CA
An otherwise lawful custodial interrogation can eventually turn unlawful if it
drags on too long, or if it involves a particularly inexperienced or vulnerable
suspect. Case cited: Doody v. Schriro (2008) 548 F3d 847. (9:47)

Every Element of Miranda Warning Must Be Given
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
All four elements of the Miranda warning must be given in some form in
order for a suspect’s statement to be admissible, regardless of whether there
is circumstantial evidence the suspect understood the right. Thus, where a
suspect was not told his statement could be used against him, the confession
should have been suppressed. Cases cited: People v. Bradford (2008) 169
Cal.App.4th 843. (5:39)

Arrest in the Home: Exigent Circumstances
with William W. Bedsworth, Appellate Court Justice, State of California
Justice Bedsworth discusses the recent case in which an en banc panel of the
9th Circuit Court of Appeals dealt with a barricaded suspect situation. The
Court held that once exigent circumstances existed to enter the suspect’s
home to arrest him (because he was armed and dangerous), the passage of
time during a 12-hour standoff did not eliminate that exigency and require
that they go get a warrant. This may seem self-evident, but it split the courts
every time it was heard and Justice Bedsworth explains why. Case cited:
Fisher v. City of San Jose (2008) DJDAR 2707 (2/26/09). (7:32)

Big Changes Re: Vehicle Searches Incident to Arrest
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
Police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to the
arrest of a recent occupant of the vehicle only if the arrestee is not secured
and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of
the search or if it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the
offense for which the arrest was made – overruling Belton. Cases cited:
Arizona v. Gant (2009) DJDAR 5611; New York v. Belton (1981) 453 U.S.
454; Chimel v. California (1969) 395 U.S. 752. (12:28)