Officer Smith did have a reason to pull over the vehicle. She believed hat the taillight was broken and covered with colored tape. It’s a simple traffic stop which she did have reason to do. For a traffic stop you really don’t need all that much to go on, you just need to see the person committing a simple traffic violation or see that their vehicle is impaired in any way in order to pull them over. So yes Officer Smith did have reasonable suspicion to pull the car over in the first place. 1. Was the “pat-down” of the driver legal? “Stop and frisk” was discussed in the case of Terry v Ohio from 1968. In the case an experienced plain clothes officer observed 3 men acting suspiciously in front of a store.
The officer concluded that they were casing the store, preparing to rob it so he approached them. He identified himself as a police officer and asked for their names. He was not satisfied with their answers, so he subjected one of the men to a search. He patted down the man’s clothing in which he felt a gun and one was removed from the man’s clothing for which he had no permit. The defendants ended up arguing that the search violated their Fourth Amendment rights because it was not supported by probable cause. The court sided with the Officer saying that stops and frisks are less intrusive than full blown searches.
The Essay on Ways To Stop Human Trafficking
In recent times, the number of human trafficking cases has skyrocketed through the roof. So, what exactly is human trafficking? Human trafficking is defined as a criminal activity, in which people are recruited, harboured, transported, bought or kidnapped for the purposes of exploitation. These exploitations include forced labour, child soldiery, sexual slavery, forced marriages and so on. ...
It also stated that officers need to have some leeway before full probable cause is reached. So in the case of Officer Smith, she believed that this could have been the car that was recently used in the roadside killing of a fellow police officer. It matched the description of the car so that’s why she had reasonable suspicion. Now if the car had not matched the description she would not have had reasonable suspicion to believe that the person had a weapon and could not have done a pat down unless she saw a weapon in plain view when coming up to the car. 2. Did exigent circumstances exist for Officer Smith to give chase to the vehicle?
The definition of exigent circumstances is: Those circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe that entry was necessary to prevent physical harm to the officers or other persons, the destruction of relevant evidence, the escape of the suspect, or some other consequence improperly frustrating legitimate law enforcement efforts. Officer Smith had already patted down the suspect and had not found any weapons but was still not sure if this was the car and suspect who had killed the fellow police officer. So when the car drove off at high speeds, the Officer did have reason to chase the vehicle.
They had not been cleared as a suspect yet so according to the definition of exigent circumstances it covers escape of a suspect. She did not want the suspect to get away so she did have reason to follow the car. 3. Was the gun in “plain view” and legally obtained? Plain view is when an officer may make a search and seizure without a warrant if evidence of criminal activity or the product of a crime can be seen without entry or search. Officer Smith simply went to the suspect’s car to retrieve her purse for the purposes of identification. When she got to the car the glove box was already open and that’s hen she noticed the gun underneath some documents. Although I’m not really sure if the gun was in plain view if it was underneath documents. Did the Officer see the outline of a gun? That’s a question I believe would have to be asked in order to know if the gun really was in plain view. But if it was on top of the documents then yes it would have been in plain view. 4. Will the marijuana baggie be admissible evidence? Yes I believe that the marijuana baggie will be admissible evidence. Officer Smith found it when she was simply looking for identification of the suspect. At the time the officer still had easonable suspicion to believe that this suspect was involved in the roadside killing of a fellow police officer. After also finding the gun I believe she had probable cause to search for any other weapons and drugs. References What is reasonable suspicion? http://www. flexyourrights. org/faqs/what-is-reasonable-suspicion/ What is the definition of Stop and Frisk? http://legal-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com/Stop+and+Frisk What is considered exigent circumstances? http://www. lectlaw. com/def/e063. htm What is the definition of plain view? http://legal-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com/Plain+View+Doctrine
The Term Paper on Gun Control 13
Gun Control Government 2301 02 November 1996 A Well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms , shall not be infringed. Amendment II, Bill of Rights Constitution of the U.S. The Second Amendment has been a major issue in American politics since 1876. In question is the intent of this Amendment. Was it meant to insure that ...
