1. The police had a warrant to arrest Dan for robbery. Dan was not in his own house but in his uncle's house as an overnight guest. The police broke into his uncle's house without a warrant and arrested Dan there. In a search of Dan's person the police found an illegal gun. At trial, Dan challenges the arrest. He argues that the arrest was illegal, for the police violated his legitimate expectation of privacy. The prosecution argues that the police did not violate Dan's legitimate expectation of privacy, for Dan was not even in his own home. Did the police violate Dan's legitimate expectation of privacy? Was the arrest legal?

2. The police searched Bob's backpack without probable cause. In it they found a bag of crack cocaine. It is later established that the bag of cocaine belongs to Charlie. Charlie is charged with possession of illegal drugs. He requests suppression of evidence. He argues that the police conducted an illegal search, for they had no probable cause to search Bob's backpack. He contends that the drugs should be excluded. Should the court exclude the drugs from evidence?

3. In Minnesota v. Carter, the Court held that the defendants did not have legitimate expectation of privacy and they could not challenge the police action. Discuss why the Court held this way.

4. An armed robbery took place in a department store. The police got the information that the robbers were in Hank's house for a party. The police entered Hank's house without a warrant and searched the house. On a tea table next to a sofa the police seized a handgun. Joe was sitting on the sofa. The officer asked him whether it was his gun. Joe denied it was his gun. Later it is established that the gun was used in the robbery and there were Joe's fingerprints on the gun. Joe is charged with robbery. He requests exclusion of the gun from evidence. He argued that the police had no probable cause to break into Hank's house. The prosecution argues that Joe has no standing to challenge the police action. Does Joe have standing to challenge the police action?

5. Bruno and Rob shared an apartment. Some problems had developed between the two and they quarreled bitterly. One day Bruno was out. A package for Bruno arrived. Rob opened the package and found drugs in it. Rob called the police. The police arrived and seized the drugs. Bruno is charged with drug offenses and he requests suppression of evidence. He argues that Rob had no permission from him to open his package and Rob's act violated his legitimate expectation of privacy. The police seizure of the package therefore violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Did the police violate Bruno's legitimate expectation of privacy? Can the drugs be used as evidence against Bruno?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 The police did violate Dans legitimate expectation of privacy by breaking into his uncles house wi... View the full answer