When the vehicle passed Officer Starr, he observed that all three occupants, Bill the driverMonica the front seat passengerand Hillary the back seat passenger Criminal procedure essay their heads toward his direction. Assuming that this is a seizure, then the question is what level of seizure — a Terry stop or an arrest.
Any statement made by a suspect in custody in response to interrogation without a valid waiver of Miranda rights, is taken in violation of the Fifth Amendment.
The red Mercury was within his estimated time of arrival. Linda and Betty had told the police that the bar was very dimly lit and that they had ingested a significant amount of alcohol when the robber entered the bar. The radio run is: The only thing Officer Starr was able to note was that the three occupants were looking in his direction.
Consent The officers do not have a warrant to search the home and so the prosecution must seek out an exception to the warrant requirement. If he does not, then he cannot move to suppress any of the items found in the home, with the exception of what is found on his person.
The prosecution will respond that the officers had not checked out the house to be sure that the reported Criminal procedure essay of gunshots have not come from somewhere else in the house, where an armed person was still hiding.
In addition, traffic stops by the police are normally considered Terry stops. Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel At the time of the line-up, Hillary had not yet been formally charged with the drug offenses, and hence her Sixth Amendment right to counsel was not violated by the fact that she had no lawyer present.
Standing A threshold question is Criminal procedure essay the three occupants have standing to contest the seizure of the marijuana from the backpack in the front seat and from the backpack in the trunk. None of the other cars that the officer saw was a red Mercury. However, the prosecutor will argue that, while the police did not have a warrant, they had an exigency, in that they had been given a call for the sound of gunshots, and for their safety, they walked around to the side of the house and looked in first.
This is especially relevant in some of the chapters in the middle of the book that detail the pretrial, trial and post-trial punishment proceedings.
The prosecution may respond that this reasonable expectation of privacy turns on whether Quentin is an overnight guest at the time of the search.
Once inside on an exigency, can they enter a room of the house for which they may not have an exigency the kitchen in order to seize the evidence they had seen in plain view? There was no exigency to search for the gun at that point, and so no reason to be opening drawers.
The vehicle stopped for a red light, then turned left into a convenience store parking lot. Most courts have found that confronting a suspect with evidence of the crime amounts to the functional equivalent of interrogation — conduct reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response.
While the defense can argue that he only has probable cause that marijuana was smoked, and not that there is more in the car, that is not likely to be persuasive. Bill admitted that he had been smoking marijuana. The officers were reasonably relying on a faulty radio report.
The prosecution will respond that this was not a seizure, or the usual traffic stop, but a consensual encounter, one from which the three occupants were free to walk away.
Demonstrative evidence is any physical exhibit that can be examined by the jury, while forensic evidence is evidence gathered and studied with the help of science and other specialized methods. However, the prosecution will argue that in those cases, the evidence was brought in and set down before the suspect, as opposed to the officer merely commenting on what he found as he was finding it.
When an officer develops probable cause to believe the car contains contraband, he may search anywhere that the contraband could be, including containers and the trunk.
The issue here is whether he unequivocally invoked his right to counsel. However, the Court has held that the showing of photographs to a witness is not a critical stage such that counsel must be present.
If he did, then the officers cannot question him unless he later initiates the questioning. But, assuming she has invoked her right to silence, the police must scrupulously honor that right.
Furthermore, the defense will argue that Quentin did not have actual authority to consent to the entry of the home since he was just a visitor to the home.
Expert evidence must conform to the common law requirements to ensure the jury presented with the necessary evident and not being confused by the expert, to alter with their judgment. If it did amount to custody, then the statement would have to be suppressed as a violation of Miranda.
It gives the witness only one choice. The caller stated that a red Mercury with a dealer license plate driving eastbound on I, at around milepost 99, was driving recklessly, swerving in and out of both lanes of traffic, speeding up to pass motorists and then slowing down in front of them.
Here, the defense will argue that despite the confidence in their identifications and the length of time they viewed the perpetrator, they had a poor opportunity to view the perpetrator as the bar was dimly lit, they were inebriated and the robber wore a cap pulled down low.
Exigency If there is no lawful consent to enter the home by Quentin, then the prosecution would argue that there was an exigency. Potential marijuana possession alone would not give them this suspicion.
They must stop questioning for a period of time and re-Mirandize her at least before questioning her again. If it is an invocation of counsel, then the officer would have violated the Fifth Amendment by urging him to speak.
Maintenance of the evidence must also be followed to the core in case a trial case is expected to take longer. Protective Sweep The prosecution will argue that Quentin was effectively under arrest at this point and the officers are allowed to do a protective sweep of the home if they have a reasonable articulable suspicion that dangerous confederates are in the home.Criminal Procedure Prepare a paper that details the entire criminal justice process for a felony criminal charge filed in a state court.
Your paper will: a. Summarize all of the steps between arrest, pre-trial, trial, and appeals (both state and federal appeal possibilities). b. Address contingencies for each stage of the proceedings and examine all. Siegel's Criminal Procedure: Essay and Multiple Choice Questions and Answers, Fifth Edition [Brian N.
Siegel, Lazar Emanuel, Christian M. Halliburton] on killarney10mile.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Siegel's Series works through key topics in a Q&A format, providing an additional source for self-quizzing. A proven resource for /5(8). Criminal Procedure Evidence Property Torts.
Back. Exam Prep Administrative Law Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Contracts Criminal Law Criminal Procedure. Criminal Procedure > Exam Prep > Essay Exams.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EXAM #3. Search. Table of Contents. Exam Prep. Add to Library. Law Dictionary. CASE BRIEFS. Criminal Procedure Essay Framework, Page 3 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 4th AMENDMENT ESSAY FRAMEWORK4 MEMORY BOX5 [MoE] FOURTH AMENDMENT 4 th Amendment, applicable to states through 14 Amendment, protects public including defendant (D) if D has a [RUG] reasonable expectation of privacy.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ESSAY QUESTION #2. MODEL ANSWER. Sophie, a police officer, out of uniform, showed up at Mariah’s house, knocked, and asked if she could enter to enact a warrant.
The warrant was a search warrant, issued by Magistrate McGuire, a former patrol cop for.
Scott Pearce’s Master Essay Method - Criminal Law and Procedure Approach Elaborate Approach Criminal Procedure Criminal Procedure issues can be said to fall into two broad categories: those that involve.Download