As a criminal defendant, you have specific legal rights. One of them is to be free from a search or seizure that is not based on probable cause. This term is a loosely defined one, yet it plays a critical role in many criminal cases. Probable cause is a basis for the foundation of your case, meaning that you cannot be arrested in the first place without it. If you have been charged with a crime, you may be able to challenge the charges due to a lack of probable cause in the first place.
An experienced criminal defense lawyer from Hogan Eickhoff can review the case against you and determine whether you have an opening to fight the charges against you.
Arrests Can Only Be Made with Probable Cause
Arrests are typically made after a warrant is issued based on probable cause. The police or prosecutor may go to a court to seek an arrest warrant. They must demonstrate to a judge that probable cause exists. Alternatively, police may make a warrantless arrest under certain circumstances. Usually, there is some type of exigent circumstance that does not allow for the police to obtain a warrant prior to making an arrest. These types of arrests occur when police are responding to a call, or they see something in the course of their daily patrols. Regardless of whether there is an actual warrant, probable cause is interpreted in the same way,
Probable Cause Can Be a Vague & Evolving Standard
Probable cause is not a term that is explicitly defined in the United States Constitution, yet it is a critical factor in many criminal cases. The Fourth Amendment states that a warrant can only be issued for an arrest based on probable cause. The end result is that much is left up to law enforcement to determine whether probable cause exists, subject to oversight from the courts. The lack of probable cause for the arrest in the first place can be grounds for you to fight the charges against you. If police lacked probable cause to seize your person, you may be able to have the charges against you thrown out entirely.
The standard of probable cause has been formulated by courts over time. This doctrine is a judicial one that continuously evolves based on the interpretations that appeals courts give in deciding cases that come before them. Broadly stated, a police officer may have probable cause when knowledge and beliefs would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime has been committed or is being committed. This is an objective standard that is based on what a reasonable police officer would believe, as opposed to the particular officer who was involved in arresting a suspect.
Any inquiry about whether there was probable cause is based on a fact-specific inquiry about what the police officer saw and knew at the time of the arrest. According to the United States Supreme Court in Illinois v. Gates, “probable cause is a practical, non-technical” standard based on “factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men act.”
What Is Probable Cause in a Criminal Case?
A practical cause must be something that is more than a mere suspicion. The officer cannot be acting on a hunch. If the police officer is acting on a tip that they received from someone else, there must be some reliability.
Many things can constitute probable cause. Some examples include the following:
- The odor of illegal drugs or other substances during the course of a traffic stop
- There is something that can be evidence of a crime, such as a weapon, that is in plain view
- A credible tip provided by a reliable witness or informant
- The suspect matches the description given by a witness, and they are in the general area where a crime may have been committed
- The officer witnesses criminal activity committed by a suspect
Probable cause is a higher standard than the reasonable suspicion that an officer needs to make an investigatory stop. For the latter, the officer must have specific and articulable facts that a crime has been or is being committed. Since the reasonable suspicion standard is lower than probable cause, it follows that an officer is more limited in what they can do when they make this type of stop. Probable cause can develop based on what a police officer learns during an investigatory stop.
The Lack of Probable Cause May Be Grounds to Dismiss the Case
You may be able to challenge whether there was probable cause to make the arrest in the first place. To do so, you must provide evidence that shows what the officer may have seen or known at the time that they made the arrest. In general, if a criminal defendant is challenging probable cause, they must carry their own burden of proof because they are trying to suppress either an arrest or evidence that was seized. If the defendant can successfully show that there may not have been probable cause, the burden of proof will then shift back to the prosecution to show that there was.
Here are some examples of situations where there may not have been probable cause to support an arrest:
- An officer just thinks that someone looks suspicious
- A tip came from an informant whom the officer should know is unreliable
- A suspect was merely present in a high-crime area without anything more
- A driver simply appears nervous during a traffic stop
- The suspect was associated with another suspect or a known criminal without anything more
Contact an Appleton Criminal Defense Lawyer
If you are facing criminal charges in Appleton, do not face the justice system alone. Hogan Eickhoff’s experienced criminal defense lawyers are here to protect your rights and fight for the best possible outcome. From misdemeanors to serious felony charges, we provide aggressive, strategic representation tailored to your case. Contact Hogan Eickhoff today for a free consultation, by calling us at (920) 450-9800 or by messaging us online, and take the first step toward defending your future with trusted legal guidance. We can help defend various misdemeanors and felonies including violent crimes, sex offenses, domestic violence, property crimes, and drug offenses.