Detail the concept for admissibility of plain sight evidence and the legal requirements for the investigator to invoke a plain sight seizure.
Explain how evidence that would have been found without the questionable search that violates the exclusionary rule could ultimately be admissible as evidence.
Relate how the court views investigators and realizes that human error will sometimes result in faulty paperwork. Explain how the court allows for such errors in the "Good Faith" principle
Select two of the three concepts known as dying declaration, the silver platter rule, and exigent circumstance expound on the meaning of each and why the court believes in such exceptions to constitutional requirements
Articulate the types of situations where it is permissible to lie to a suspect to elicit a confession. What aspects would be allowed by the court and what would be prohibited.
In accordance with BrainMass standards this is not a hand in ready assignment but only background help.
When there is plain sight evidence of contraband or other evidence made when the officer is in a place where he has the right to be is admissible. (See: North v. Superior Court (1972) 8 Cal.3rd,301, 306). When a police officer observes criminal activity from a place accessible to general public, the observation is not search (United States v. Garcia (9th Cir. 1993) 997 F.2nd 1273, 1279),
The legal requirements for plain sight seizure are that the officer must have reasonable cause to believe that a particular crime has been committed, the evidence must not be obtained from invasion, intrusion, or illegal entry, the evidence must be in plain sight or readily accessible to routine inspection, the evidence shows a commission of crime, and the seizure is necessary to preserve potential evidence. (People v. Curley (1970) 12 Cal.App.3rd 732)
Evidence that would have been found without questionable search that violates the exclusionary rule could ultimately be admissible as ...
This solution explains admissible evidence in the exclusionary rule. The sources used are also included in the solution. 712 words.
Is the evidence collected by the arresting officer admissible or non-admissible?
With the following reading address the following...
In March of 2005, the Tempe Police Department arrested Jeff Barnes for possession of heroin near the intersection of McClintock and Lakeshore, around 10:00 p.m.?his second arrest near this area in the past few months. Pending trial, the court released him, mandating he was not to come within two blocks of the location.
In late July of 2005, Officer Christina Pace was patrolling this same area around 10:30 p.m. The officer located Mr. Barnes sitting in his vehicle within the area of McClintock and Lakeshore, and called for backup. As Officer Pace pulled behind the vehicle, Mr. Barnes attempted to leave the area, unsuccessfully. He was apprehended and placed under arrest; handcuffs were used and Miranda rights were read.
Conducting a search of Mr. Barnes's person, Officer Pace found a small bag of marijuana, lose change, and some cigarettes. Another officer's search of Barnes's vehicle yielded a small bag of heroin and syringes, which were found after prying open a locked glove compartment. The officers searched the area around the vehicle and subsequent block while Barnes remained in custody. Finding no other evidence, Officer Pace transported Mr. Barnes to the stationhouse.
*** Using the above article:
Identify types of authorized arrests; differentiate between acceptable and unacceptable police action, during and before an arrest; determine if the arrest is a proper seizure of persons under the Fourth Amendment. Is the evidence collected by the arresting officer admissible or non-admissible? Explain your answer.View Full Posting Details