How JustAnswer Works:

  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.

Ask socrateaser Your Own Question

socrateaser
socrateaser, Lawyer
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 34675
Experience:  Retired (mostly)
10097515
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
socrateaser is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Office Jones who is on a routine traffic patrol in your state

Customer Question

Office Jones who is on a routine traffic patrol in your state receives information that a late model foreign car was taken at gunpoint from a motorist about one hour earlier ,10 miles away. The only description of the individual who took the car was a young male wearing a baseball cap. A few minutes later the officer Jones observes a young Hispanic male driving a late model BMW. The driver John is obeying all traffic laws, including speed limit. John isn't wearing a baseball cap. Officer Jones pulls John over and asks him for his license and car registration. John informs the officer that he doesn't have a license and that he borrowed the car from his uncle. Officer Jones spots a New York Yankees baseball cap in the back seat. He asks John to remain in the car and uses his radio to check on the BMW plates. He's told on the radio that the BMW was in fact the car that was stolen in the robbery earlier. Officer places handcuffs on John without advising him of his consttitutional rights
Submitted: 5 years ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.

Auto Stop

 

An automobile stop may be based upon reasonable suspicion, i.e., a reasonable belief that criminal activity is afoot.

 

Here, Jones stop is unreasonable because John violated no law, was not wearing the identifying baseball cap, and the vehicle make wasn't specified in the police report.

Therefore, the stop was unlawful.

 

Exclusonary Rule

 

Evidence obtained as part of an unlawful search and seizure is inadmissible against the defendant as "fruit of the poisonous tree."

 

Here, because Jones spotted the incriminate baseball cap after making an unlawful stop, the baseball cap cannot be used as evidence to prove that Jones is the thief. Similarly, John's having no license is also inadmissible, because but for the unlawful stop, his not having a license would not have been discovered.

 

Inevitable Discovery

 

However, evidence otherwise inadmissible, becomes admissible if the government proves by a preponderance of evidence that it would have been discovered inevitably.

 

Here, if the state could show that the vehicle would have later been identified more precisely and that it would have been stopped by other police officers in the vicinity, then perhaps the court would find the baseball cap admissilbe.

 

On balance here, this is an unlikely outcome and the baseball cap will be inadmissible.

 

Miranda Warning

 

Failure to advise a person of their constitutional rights after arrest, renders any self-incriminating statements inadmissible against that person.

 

Here, John's statements about his license and borrowing the car from his uncle were made prior to arrest, so they are each admissible, regardless of the failure to give a MIranda Warning.

 

Regardless, as the stop was bad from the outset, all of the evidence later acquired is inadmisslbe, and John cannot be prosecuted for the theft.

 

socrateaser, Lawyer
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 34675
Experience: Retired (mostly)
socrateaser and 2 other Criminal Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

rights under the fifth amendements, asks him if he was involved in the robbery. John tells him that he was and tells the officer that the gun he used is in the trunk. Officer Jones recovers the gun in the trunk and the baseball cap as evidence. John then tells the officer that he's a memeber of the street gang MS13 and that this was part of the initiation

Essay1 If you were the police odfficer who arrested John, with what crimes would you charge him?

Essay2) If you were the defense attorney, what arguments do you make in court challenging the police stop of your client? If you 're the district attorney, what arguments would you make in support of the police stop?

Essay3) If you're the defense attorney what arguments do you make in court to exclude from evidence the statememts that your client made to the police? If you're the district attorney, what arguments would you make to allow the admissibility of the statement?

Essay4) If you're a social worker hired by John's family to prepare a favorable report for the sentencing court, what factors would you look for John's background to help mitigate the sentence?

These are the answers I need for this assignments... In essay form and about 250 words each. The end of the story is what I wrote on the top.

Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.

E1.

 

Officer Jones can charge John with: robbery for taking the vehicle at gunpoint; driving without a license; obstruction of justice for lying to the officer about borrowing the car from John's his uncle; conspiracy to commit robbery, for taking the vehicle as part of an agreement with the gang; RICO racketering for the combination of robbery and obstruction of justice.

 

E2 and E3: are completely covered by my first answer in this thread, and I would answer the together, because they are both essentially the same question.

 

Except that I will amend my answer to incude your remaining facts, as follows:

 

Miranda Warning

 

Failure to advise a person of their constitutional rights after arrest, renders any self-incriminating statements inadmissible against that person.

 

Here, John's statements about his license and borrowing the car from his uncle were made prior to arrest, so they are each admissible, despite the failure to give a MIranda Warning.

 

As to the statements made by John after his arrest, about the location of the gun, and John's membership in the MS13 gang,they are each inadmissible against him, because no Miranda Warning was provided, prior to John's confessing.

 

In summary, as the stop was bad from the outset, all of the evidence later acquired is inadmisslbe, and John cannot be prosecuted for the theft.

 

E4: A social worker could argue that John had no prior arrests or convictions, no one ad no thing was injured during the robbery, and John was a unwitting victim of the coercive effect of the MS13 gang, having come from an environment where survival frequently means alignment with a gang.

 

Good luck.

Customer: replied 5 years ago.
Hello can you please help me with the exam number I have posted Please!
Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.
You will have to post the question here for my review.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

Ok here goes the questions.

1. The supreme court recognized that justification for a lawful arrest is sufficien for a search in which of the following cases?

a.Maryland v Buie

b. united states v. edwards

c. United states v. robinson

d. James v. louisiana

2.In which of the following cases did the supreme court rule that permission given by a third person to law enforcement officers to conduct a warrantless search is valid if the htird person reasonbly believes that he or she has that authority ,even if she or he doesn't

a. illinois v rodriguez

b.chapman v. united states

c. stoner v california

d. coolidgev. new hampshire

3. in which of the following cases did the court rule that a landlord's rights don't include permission for the landlord to consent to a warrantless search of a tenant's premises

a. illinois v. rodriguez

b. chapman v. united states

c. stoner v. california

d. united states v. matlock

4. in which of the following cases did the court decide that a prosecutor has the burden to show that consent was freely and voluntarily given.

a. illinois v. rodriguez

b. bumper v. north carolina

c. stoner v. california

d. united states v matlock

5. In which of the following cases did the supreme court rule that there's n voluntary consent to a search when a law enforcement officer claims that the occupant doesn't have a right to resist search?

a. illinois v. rodriguez

b. bumper v. north crolina

c. ohio v. robinette

d. united states v. matlock

6. In which of the following cases did the supreme court say that a person doesn'thave a reasonable expectation of rivacy regarding a vehicle identification number?

a. Minnesota v. dckerson

b. chadwick v. united states

c.coolidge v. new hampshire

d. new yorj v. class

7. in whic of the following cases did the supreme court talk about the discovery of contraband duing a valid terry search for a weapon in n utomobile?

a. Minnesota v. Dickerson

b.michigan v. long

c.texas v. brown

d. nw york v. class

8 In which of the following cases did the supreme court say ht if there's no probable cause and an object in plain view isn't immediately and apparently contrabnd, then the plain view doctrin won't extend to the seizure of that object in plain view?

a. minnesota . Dickerson

b.Michigan v. long

c. coolidge v. new hampshire

d. horton v. california

9. if law enforcement officershave probable cause to search a specific container in a vehicle tey may search the container but not the entire vehicle, according to the supreme court in which of the following cases?

a. california v. acevdo

b. caroll v. united states

c. colorado v. betrine

d. united states v. Di Re

10. After a vehicle is impounded, law enforcement officers may do an iventory search according to which of the following supreme courst cases?

a. clifornia v. acevad

b. south dakota v. opperman

c. colorado v. bertrine

d. uited states v. di re

11. in what case did the supreme court rule an invetory search of an impounded vehicle couldinclude the opening of closed container in the vehicle?

a. california v. acevado

b. south dakota v. opperman

c.colorado v. bertrine

d. illinois v.lafayette

12. the supreme court directly addresses the issue of whether the caroll doctrine applied to lugguage in a vehicle in which of the following cases?

a. united states v. chadwick

b. south dakota v. opperman

c. coolidge v. new hampshire

d.illinois v. lafayette

13. the supreme court said that a reasonable expectation of privacy extends to the area immediately surrounding the home in which of the following cases?

a. florida v. riley

b. oliver v. unites states

c.united states v. dunn

d california v. ciraolo

14. In which of the following cases did the supreme court rule that fourth amendment preotection don't extend to open fields?

a. Hester v nited states

b. Abel v. united states

c. united states v dunn

d. Dow chemical co v. united states

15. n which of the following cases did the supreme court rule that there's nothing unlawful about the warrantless seizure of abandonned property by law enforcement officer?

a. Hester v. united states

b. abel v. united states

c.califrnia v greenwood

d. Dow chemical co v. united states

16. If a police officer changes his position to get a better view of the interior of a vehicle there's no legitimate expectation of privacy under

a. united statesd v. silva

b. texas v. brown.

c. trask.v robbins

d United states v. eaton

17. The supreme court recognized the need for a plain feel exception to the stop and frisk doctrine in which of the following cases?

a. Minnesota v. dickerson

b. michigan v. Long

c. california v. hodari

d. united states v Mendenhall

 

 

18. Police officer can search a mobile car without a search warrant if ther's probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband under

a. united states v. Mckeever

b. chambers v. maroney

c. pennsylvania v. labron

d. united states v. tate

 

19. in which of the following cases did the supreme court say that when there's a lawful custodial arrest in a car , a law enforcement officer may search the paessenger compartment of the car?

a. chimel v. california

b.united state v. robinson

c. united states v. chadwick

d. New york v. belton

20. The supreme court said a search must be contemporaneous with the arrest in which of the following cases?

a. chimel california

b.united states v. edward

c. united states v. chadwick

d. james v. louisana

 

I have accepted the questions that you have answers for me in the past. Sorry about the confusion. But if you don't mind please help me with these question. It is criminal procedures.. Thanks in advanceCustomer/p>

Customer: replied 5 years ago.
Ok the questions are right after Office Jones questionnaire. Please review and help me out. Thx
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
OK THE NEXT QUESTION IS RIGHT AFTER OFFICER JONES AND IT CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EXAM NUMBER40668900. PLEASE HELP THX
Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.
I regret that I must opt out of this question. Hopefully, someone else will be interested in helping you.

JustAnswer in the News:

 
 
 
Ask-a-doc Web sites: If you've got a quick question, you can try to get an answer from sites that say they have various specialists on hand to give quick answers... Justanswer.com.
JustAnswer.com...has seen a spike since October in legal questions from readers about layoffs, unemployment and severance.
Web sites like justanswer.com/legal
...leave nothing to chance.
Traffic on JustAnswer rose 14 percent...and had nearly 400,000 page views in 30 days...inquiries related to stress, high blood pressure, drinking and heart pain jumped 33 percent.
Tory Johnson, GMA Workplace Contributor, discusses work-from-home jobs, such as JustAnswer in which verified Experts answer people’s questions.
I will tell you that...the things you have to go through to be an Expert are quite rigorous.
 
 
 

What Customers are Saying:

 
 
 
  • Your Expert advise has provided insight on a difficult situation. Thank you so much for the prompt response. I will definitely recommend your website to my friends. Norma Pensacola, FL
< Last | Next >
  • Your Expert advise has provided insight on a difficult situation. Thank you so much for the prompt response. I will definitely recommend your website to my friends. Norma Pensacola, FL
  • Mr. Kaplun clearly had an exceptional understanding of the issue and was able to explain it concisely. I would recommend JustAnswer to anyone. Great service that lives up to its promises! Gary B. Edmond, OK
  • My Expert was fast and seemed to have the answer to my taser question at the tips of her fingers. Communication was excellent. I left feeling confident in her answer. Eric Redwood City, CA
  • I am very pleased with JustAnswer as a place to go for divorce or criminal law knowledge and insight. Michael Wichita, KS
  • PaulMJD helped me with questions I had regarding an urgent legal matter. His answers were excellent. Three H. Houston, TX
  • Anne was extremely helpful. Her information put me in the right direction for action that kept me legal, possible saving me a ton of money in the future. Thank you again, Anne!! Elaine Atlanta, GA
  • It worked great. I had the facts and I presented them to my ex-landlord and she folded and returned my deposit. The 50 bucks I spent with you solved my problem. Tony Apopka, FL
 
 
 

Meet The Experts:

 
 
 
  • Fran L.

    JustAnswer Criminal Law Mentor

    Satisfied Customers:

    8061
    18 yrs of NYC public defense. Extensive arraignment, hearing, trial experience.
< Last | Next >
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/RE/retiredlawyer/2012-6-6_19326_franL.64x64.jpg Fran L.'s Avatar

    Fran L.

    JustAnswer Criminal Law Mentor

    Satisfied Customers:

    8061
    18 yrs of NYC public defense. Extensive arraignment, hearing, trial experience.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/RA/ratioscripta/2012-6-13_2955_foto3.64x64.jpg Ely's Avatar

    Ely

    Counselor at Law

    Satisfied Customers:

    2079
    Private practice with focus on family, criminal, PI, consumer protection, and business consultation.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/NA/nathanmoorelaw/2011-5-31_21375_headshotbig.64x64.jpg Nate's Avatar

    Nate

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1625
    Over 10 years of criminal defense practice.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/LA/LawTalk/2012-6-6_17379_LawTalk.64x64.JPG LawTalk's Avatar

    LawTalk

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1434
    30 years legal experience
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/PH/philip.simmons/2012-6-7_161915_BIGPhilipSimmons.64x64.jpg P. Simmons's Avatar

    P. Simmons

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1418
    16 yrs. of experience including criminal law.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/marshadjd/2009-6-1_194320_marshajd.jpg Marsha411JD's Avatar

    Marsha411JD

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1380
    Licensed attorney with 27 yrs. exp. in criminal law
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/RO/RobertJDFL/2012-6-6_175352_7538220120606.64x64.jpg RobertJDFL's Avatar

    RobertJDFL

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1300
    Experienced in multiple areas of the law.
 
 
 
Chat Now With A Criminal Lawyer
socrateaser
socrateaser
Criminal Lawyer
34675 Satisfied Customers
Retired (mostly)