The Bill of Rights, which is entrenched in the American Constitution, establishes that crime suspects are to be treated in a constitutional manner throughout the criminal justice system. Suspected criminals must be arrested within the constitutional confines and the reason for their arrest given to these suspects. Moreover, the arresting officers must outline the constitutional rights of the suspects prior to the arrest. The insistence on constitutional rights ought to be there during investigations, trial and ultimate sentencing. An analysis into the criminal justice process associated with Howell Donaldson III popularly known as the Seminole Heights killer reveals this insistence on constitutional rights. In this case, the law enforcement officers used various methods to decide that Howell was the main suspect in addition to getting a warrant to search for evidence.
Summary of the events leading up to the arrest of Howell Donaldson
Howell Donaldson was arrested on November 28, 2017, after the police received a tip that there was a man with a gun at a certain McDonald’s outlet in Yibor. This arrest followed four murders that occurred on October 9, 11, 19 and November 14. The arresting officers charged Howell with four counts of first-degree murders involving Monica Hoffa, Benjamin Mitchel, Ronald Felton, and Anthony Naiboa (Stringini, 2017). On arrest, the detectives questioned Howell on Tuesday evening. During the questioning, Howell gave his consent for the police to search his car, his cellphone and to examine his gun at the FDLE laboratory.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Elements of the arrest as related to this case
Arresting police officers must stick with constitutional provisions when making arrests. In fact, the constitutional rights as envisaged in the Fourth Amendment are there to protect the suspect's rights. The arrest process contains four elements all of which must be followed to enhance the legality of the process. The first element is obtaining a specific warrant of arrest from a judge after presenting a written affidavit (Carmen and Hemmens, 2016). The second element is an oath or affirmation, which allows the officers to affirm that the facts in the affidavit are true to the best of the officers’ knowledge. The third element is probable cause, which means that the arresting officer reasonably believes to be true about the alleged offender. The last element is the actual arrest or detainment of the alleged offender.
The four elements of arrest are evident in Howell’s arrest, which then makes the arrest constitutional. The arresting officers obtained an arrest warrant after providing a written affidavit, which placed Howell at the center of the four murders. The affidavit outlines how each of the four victims died, the witness accounts and the incriminating evidence and video surveillance linking the murders to Howell. On arrest, the police read Howell his Miranda rights before confronting him with the incriminating evidence after which they booked Howell early Wednesday morning.
Identification of the four requirements for search and seizure with a warrant and description of how the search and seizure process was carried out for this case
The Fourth Amendment protects the American citizen from unlawful and unreasonable searches and seizures which intrudes into their privacy. however, law enforcement officers can conduct these searches with a valid search warrant, which must meet several requirements. For one the search warrant must have been filled good faith by the law enforcement officers. Secondly, the warrant must establish a probable cause based on reliable information. Next search warrant must be issued by a detached or neutral judge. Lastly, the search warrant must specify the place to be searched and the items to be seized (Burke, 2016).
The search warrant which led to the search of Howells car and seizure of his gun and clothing met the four requirements. The law enforcement officers who filled the search warrant did so in good faith considering that there was a trail of murders threatening the public. Moreover, the law enforcement officers filled the search warrant guided by reliable information regarding the suspect thus advancing a probable cause. Furthermore, the warrant was issued by a neutral judge who was not interested in the outcome of this case in any way. Finally, the search warrant was specific that the search was to be conducted in Howell’s car, the surveillance cameras and his gun was seized to aid in the investigation (WFTS Web Team, 2017).
Explanation of the various aspects of the plain view doctrine and describe how this is relevant to Howell Donaldson case
There are times when the law enforcement officers can seize objects, which are not described in the search warrant if these objects will aid in the investigation. This provision falls squarely on the plain view doctrine and calls for the law enforcement officers to identify the items (Graves, 2013). In the case of Howell, Donaldson, the warrant established that the law enforcement officers were free to conduct a search in Howell’s, cellphone, and car. However, on searching the car, the police found a trunk, which contained Howells clothing. The clothing became part of the unspecified items but these bloodstained clothes would help the police complete their investigation and link Howell to the four murders (Stringini, 2017). Furthermore, the police got hold of a McDonald's food bag, which contained a .40 caliber Glock firearm, which was not a part of the search warrant items.
Compare and contrast the various means of identifying suspects and describe the process used in Howell Donald’s case
The process of identifying suspects can be exhausting and demanding considering that the law enforcement officers must only arrest the rightful suspects. However, this task can be simplified if law enforcement officers use various means of identifying suspects. One of the means of identifying suspects is through witness accounts where the witness knew the suspect. The witness can be called upon to identify a witness from a lineup. The other method used by law enforcement officers is by considering whether the suspect was near the crime scene at the time of the crime. The police can rely on footages, fingerprints, audio recordings, digital images or photographs to identify suspects. In the case of Howell, the police used both of these methods in that they used witness accounts, which placed Howell at the center of the murders. Moreover, the police reviewed the footage of the security cameras in addition to tracking his cellphone records. Both of these methods eventually helped to connect the dots and bring Howell to trial.
Summary of the basic constitutional rights of the accused during the trial
The United States Constitutions are quite clear on constitutional rights, which are to be accorded to the accused. For one, according to the Sixth Amendment, the accused has a right to counsel or legal representation by a person of his or her choosing. In the event that the accused cannot afford legal representation, then the government should provide the accused with an attorney. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure assert that the accused should have an attorney at every trial stage to enhance fairness. (Wadron, 2016) moreover, the accused person has the right to confront and question a witness with an aim of reducing the impact of the witness accounts. Furthermore, the Fifth Amendments asserts that the accused has the right fight attempts which may lead to self-incrimination. In this case, the accused can choose to the respondent to respond to the questions they feel can incriminate them. Of importance is the fact that the Sixth Amendment allows the accused to get witnesses who will lead the case to their favor.
References
Burke, A. S. (2016). Consent Searches and Fourth Amendment Reasonableness. Florida Law Review, 67(2), 509-563.
Carmen, R. V., & Hemmens, C. (2016). Criminal procedure: Law and practice . Cengage Learning.
Graves, M. W. (2013). Digital archaeology: The art and science of digital forensics. New York: Addison-Wesley
Stringini, M. (2017). Seminole Heights Killings: Timeline of events that led to arrest of Howell Emanuel Donaldson III. ABC Action News. Retrieved on 6 March 2019, from https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/region-tampa/seminole-heights-killings-timeline-of-events-that-lead-to-arrest-of-howell-emanuel-donaldson-iii
Waldron, J. (2016).Participatory Rights. In Weston, B. H., & Grear, A. (eds.) Human Rights in the World Community: Issues and Action (4ed.). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 126.
WFTS Web Team. (2017). Arrest documents reveal key evidence against suspected Seminole Heights killer. ABC Action News . Retrieved on 6 March 2019, from https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/region-tampa/tampa-police-chief-officers-investigate-tip-at-mcdonalds-possibly-related-to-seminole-heights
