Blog

A confession alone will sustain a conviction.

Which of the following represents the correct order of stages within the project life cycle?

This chapter, Evidence is Admissible If Obtained During an Administrative Function Under the “Special Needs” of Government (whew!), lists 5 Learning Objectives.  Which one below is NOT one of those learning objectives?

Concerning vehicle checkpoint stops, police may stop vehicles for all purposes but which of the following:

With regard to public buildings, airports, and courthouses for example, administrative searches are considered “valid” (any evidence obtained can be used in court as a special need) because of:  1)  the need for security, and 2) persons entering public places where they know they will be “screened” or even searched are doing so are, in essence, consenting to the search or screen to enter.

Which one of the statements below is the principal argument against the exclusionary rule:

You, as a smart drug dealer who doesn’t know you are under surveillance, put your trash cans out on the street for pick-up by the sanitation department.  The stupid cops pick up those trash cans and find evidence consistent with their case against in your trash cans.  Will the court allow your motion to suppress that evidence (keep it out of court)? TRUE:  Yes, the court WILL throw out that evidence FALSE:  No, the Court WILL allow the evidence into court 

An officer stops a vehicle for the minor infraction of running a stop sign.  When the officer “runs” the plate, she finds that the automobile: belongs to Tobe Frank, a black male; is not stolen; Mr. Frank has active warrants for his arrest for multiple drug violations.  Upon approaching the vehicle, the officer sees the operator of the vehicle is a white male.  She also smells an odor, consistent in her experience, to be marijuana.  The officer asks (routine question) the while male for his driver’s license, proof of insurance, and registration and adds, “are you the owner of the vehicle?” (already knowing that he isn’t the owner).  The driver seems nervous to the officer.  After issuing the citation (she “ran” the driver, Ino Fibber, and he has no attachments or warrants and is “clear” in all databases), the driver signs the citation.  The officer then asks the driver (no other passengers) if he would mind consenting to a search of the vehicle.  Mr. Fibber refuses to give consent for the search on the grounds that the automobile is not his property and that the vehicle actually belongs to his friend Tobe Frank and he just borrowing it. First part (I) of two part answer: assume the officer smells nothing, but is asking for consent anyway.  Is Mr. Fibber correct in that because he is not the owner, the officer may not search the vehicle? Second Part (II):  All the information in the scenario is correct (she smells the odor of possible marijuana), will Mr. Fibber’s denial of consent to search by the officer prevent the officer from the search?  

The Exclusionary Rule is primarily centered around police misconduct violating the 4th and 5th Amendments.

While on routine patrol, my partner and I were dispatched to a disturbance at 123 Stupid Street.  When we got to the front of 125 Stupid Street, we saw a man laying on the ground with an arrow through his body entering at the liver area and exiting through the rib cage on the left.  The man was in obvious pain and barely able to speak.  People were screaming and pointing at another man who they said did it to the man with the arrow in his gut.  While my partner grabbed the guy they were pointing at, I bent down and began to question the man with the arrow in his gut to get a statement.  The man asked me if he was dying.   Under what exception was I likely involved in at that moment?