Police Encounters with Suspects and Evidence

Published: 2021-09-29 15:10:11
essay essay

Category: Police

Type of paper: Essay

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Hey! We can write a custom essay for you.

All possible types of assignments. Written by academics

Analysis and application: police encounters with suspects and evidence| CJ227-08 Criminal procedure| Unit 2: analysis and application: police encounters with suspects and evidence| 1. Did officer Smith have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of this vehicle?Officer Smith had reasonable suspicion which is based on the totality of the circumstances as understood by those versed in the field of law enforcement; it is commonly described as something more than a hunch but less than probable cause. (quiz law) The answer is yes, Officer Smith did have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of the vehicle. Because the taillight appeared to be broken which is a traffic law violation.Also officer Smith remembered a vehicle that matched the general description of the car that he stopped.
This car fit the description of the vehicle that was suspected in a recent roadside killing of another police officer. 2. Was the “pat-down” of the driver legal? An officer may order a motorist out of a car to ensure the officer’s safety. (quiz law) The police officer may conduct a pat-down search to ensure there are no weapons. quiz law) The “pat-down” is a quick search of a person’s being in order to determine if any weapons are present. Officer Smith’s pat-down was legal because it was necessary to ensure his safety. Instead of providing her license and registration, the driver speeds away which resulted in a high speed chase.
This is a circumstance that would cause a reasonable person to believe that entry (or other relevant prompt action) was necessary to prevent physical harm to the officers or other persons. (The lectric law library,1995-2011) This situation does fall under exigent circumstance because there is imminent danger, destruction, and the suspect is trying to escape. (quiz law) 4. Was the gun in “plain view” and legally obtained?Plain-view doctrine the rule permitting a police officer’s warrantless seizure and use as evidence of an item observed in plain view from a lawful position or during a legal search when the item is evidence of a crime. To determine if the plain view doctrine applies, police must consider a number of validations one is due to exigent circumstances, which Officer Smith’s finding the gun falls under. (quiz law) Plain view did apply to Officer Smith finding the gun in the open glove compartment and is lawful.The gun was discovered inadvertently, Officer Smith had lawful access to the place from which the gun could be plainly seen.
Inadvertent discovery a law-enforcement officer’s unexpected finding of incriminating evidence in plain view. 5. Will the marijuana baggie be admissible evidence? When a person is unable to give consent due to unconsciousness, the officer can search the purse or wallet of the suspect to get their I. D. , it’s called implied consent.The woman gave Officer Smith probable cause to conduct a full search when she fled from Officer Smith when he pulled her over for the taillight. Officer Smith will be able to use the marijuana baggie as evidence.
While looking for the unconscious woman’s I. D. , Officer Smith found a baggie of marijuana in her purse. Since the woman fled and wrecked the car Officer Smith has probable cause and the marijuana baggie can used as evidence.

Warning! This essay is not original. Get 100% unique essay within 45 seconds!


We can write your paper just for 11.99$

i want to copy...

This essay has been submitted by a student and contain not unique content

People also read