Principles of the justice system

Background The 4th amendment of the US Constitution prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures.” Those are searches and seizures that are not based on a key legal concept, “probable cause.” Probable cause, simply stated, would be facts and circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe that a particular person committed a crime, or that a particular person has evidence to a crime in a certain location. Given that, the officer may arrest the person and/or search for evidence. The exclusionary rule was a rule that developed from a case known as US v. Weeks (1912). That rule states that evidence illegally seized can not be used in a criminal prosecution. It is “excluded”. That rule was later expanded to both federal and state courts in Mapp v. Ohio (1961). Using the information you learned from Module 10, your chapter readings and exploratory research, analyze the facts below and answer the questions presented in a mini paper (APA OR MLA formatted, double spaced, with AT LEAST three (3) additional sources. Facts A police officer is on routine patrol. He spots a person who he believes looks suspicious. The person is driving a car in front of him. After following the person, a man, for a few minutes, the officer decides to stop and detain him and find out if he has committed a crime. The officer makes a traffic stop and confronts the man. He checks his ID and asks him to step from the car. Believing that he has committed a crime, the officer, using keys from the man, opens the trunk and finds a bloody blanket. He learns that the man lives nearby. After placing the man under arrest, searching him and putting him in him in his patrol car, he drives to the man’s house a few blocks away. He enters the house with the belief that he will find evidence of a serious crime. Once inside, the officer discovers the body of a boy, approximately 5, who appears to have been dead for several hours. The body was nude with blood around the mouth and rectal area. He secures the scene, requests detectives and CSI’s and transports the suspect to the station for booking. In route, he asks the suspect why he did it. The suspect replied that he didn’t mean to do it. It was an accident. The crime lab is able to match the blood found on the blanket to the victim’s blood. They also are able to do a DNA match with semen found in the decedent’s rectum to the suspect. Question 1 Examine the initial stop. Was the stop legal? Why or why not? Consider consensual encounter, reasonable suspicion, probable cause. Which one, if any, existed? Why, how? Be sure to use all the rules you have learned thus far as support, be sure to state what those rules are as well as where you obtained them from (statute, penal code, book, website, ect.) and THEN let me know WHY you are choosing the answer you are. Question 2 Evaluate the removal of the driver from the vehicle. Under the circumstances of the stop, was this legal? Why or why not? For what was this man arrested? Be sure to use all the rules you have learned thus far as support, be sure to state what those rules are as well as where you obtained them from (statute, penal code, book, website, ect.) and THEN let me know WHY you are choosing the answer you are. Question 3 Consider the search of the vehicle. What rules govern this search? Was this search constitutionally valid? Why or Why not? What case decisions govern the search? What evidence was seized? Was this evidence seized lawfully? Why or why not? What case decisions? Be sure to use all the rules you have learned thus far as support, be sure to state what those rules are as well as where you obtained them from (statute, penal code, book, website, ect.) and THEN let me know WHY you are choosing the answer you are. Question 4 Evaluate the interview and subsequent confession. Was this interview conducted constitutionally? Why or why not? What case decisions apply? Be sure to use all the rules you have learned thus far as support, be sure to state what those rules are as well as where you obtained them from (statute, penal code, book, website, ect.) and THEN let me know WHY you are choosing the answer you are. Question 5 Evaluate the transportation of the suspect to his residence. Consider the entry into the suspect’s home. What issues exist in that entry? If the entry was legal, under what rule is it legal? If the entry was not legal, explain why not? Be sure to use all the rules you have learned thus far as support, be sure to state what those rules are as well as where you obtained them from (statute, penal code, book, website, ect.) and THEN let me know WHY you are choosing the answer you are. Your Position According to the scenario, the evidence in this case was determined to be unconstitutionally seized and subject to the exclusionary rule. Consider the facts in this case and create a scenario that would have overcome the challenge to the evidence and would have avoided a ruling via the Exclusionary rule that prevented the evidence from being excluded. In other words, how can these problems you’ve already discussed be changed so that the suspect could be successfully prosecuted? Be sure to use all the rules you have learned thus far as support, be sure to state what those rules are as well as where you obtained them from (statute, penal code, book, website, ect.) and THEN let me know WHY you are choosing the answer you are.