Search and Seizure:
Officer Jones of the Fairfax Police Department is informed by Bart that Deft assaulted him. While filing a formal complaint, Bart becomes hazy and argumentative when pressed for the reason for the assault, and ultimately refused to file the complaint and leaves the police station. Officer Jones believes that Deft had assaulted Bart because Bart failed to pay Deft for cocaine Deft sold to Bart. He obtains a valid arrest warrant for Deft on an assault charge. He and his partner go to Deft's apartment and arrest Deft at the front door when he responds to their knock. The officers then walk through the apartment and, in a rear bedroom, see drug paraphernalia which they left in place. Officer Jones then obtains a search warrant of Deft's apartment for cocaine and drug paraphernalia. The affidavit in support of the warrant recited that Deft had sold cocaine to Bart. The affidavit also recited that a police officer had seen drug paraphernalia in Deft's apartment. The affidavit did not disclose the circumstances in which police observed the drug paraphernalia. Officer Jones then executes the search warrant and seizes the drug paraphernalia, and also finds and seizes several bags of what the lab analysis states is crack cocaine.
1. Deft seeks to exclude the evidence of the paraphernalia found at his apartment, contending that the initial search that led to the first discovery of the paraphernalia was a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. What result?
2. Deft alternatively argues through counsel that the search pursuant to the warrant that uncovers the crack cocaine is likewise a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. What result?
1. In this case, Deft could not legally exclude the evidence of the paraphernalia found his apartment, based on the premise that the initial search that led to the first discovery of the paraphernalia was in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. The officer in this case was lawfully present in Deft's apartment, and the drug paraphernalia ...