Accounting
Anthropology
Archaeology
Art History
Banking
Biology & Life Science
Business
Business Communication
Business Development
Business Ethics
Business Law
Chemistry
Communication
Computer Science
Counseling
Criminal Law
Curriculum & Instruction
Design
Earth Science
Economic
Education
Engineering
Finance
History & Theory
Humanities
Human Resource
International Business
Investments & Securities
Journalism
Law
Management
Marketing
Medicine
Medicine & Health Science
Nursing
Philosophy
Physic
Psychology
Real Estate
Science
Social Science
Sociology
Special Education
Speech
Visual Arts
Question
You are a police officer investigating a double homicide. You have suspicion that a particular person may be involved, but do not have probable cause. You follow the individual for several days without developing additional incriminating evidence, but you are convinced the individual is guilty and may very well kill again. When the suspect leaves his apartment, he leaves the front door unlocked. You open the door and see a gun on the coffee table that matches the type forensics has determined fired the fatal bullets in the double homicide. There is no one else in the apartment, so you leave and wait across the street. A few hours later, you see the suspect stumbling towards his apartment, obviously under the influence of alcohol. You wait until he is at his front door and approach him with the idea of arresting him for public intoxication after he opens the door. You do so and, as you arrest the suspect, the gun is in plain view. Based on the arrest and the gun being in plain view, the evidence is seized consistent with the law and will be instrumental in convicting the suspect. No one knows that you had earlier entered the apartment without probable cause, which would render the search suspect and the evidence likely excluded at trial. Does this raise an ethical issue for the police officer? If so, how should the police officer deal with it?Answer
This answer is hidden. It contains 779 characters.
Related questions
Q:
Government's restriction of the press through use of prior restraint is rare in the United States and most other democratic countries.a. Trueb. False
Q:
In the case of Texas v. Johnson (1989), the Supreme Court ruled: "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." This case involved:
a. child pornography
b. flag burning
c. cross burning
d. nude dancing
Q:
The Supreme Court justified the screening of inmate mail in:
a. Prewitt v. State of Arizona ex rel. Eyman (1969).
b. Procunier v. Martinez (1974).
c. City of Ladue v. Gilleo (1994).
d. Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997).
Q:
Which of the following is not part of the threepart test in determining "imminent lawless action"?
a. The speaker subjectively intended incitement.
b. In context, the words used were likely to produce imminent, lawless action
c. the words used by the speaker objectively encouraged and urged incitement.
d. the words used by the speaker caused excitement.
Q:
The Supreme Court ruled that cities may not prohibit yard signs in:
a. Prewitt v. State of Arizona ex rel. Eyman (1969).
b. Procunier v. Martinez (1974).
c. City of Ladue v. Gilleo (1994).
d. Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997).
Q:
The right to peaceful assembly:
a. permits anyone to enter private property to assert protected speech.
b. involves the right to assemble in public places.
c. permits demonstrations on the property of private abortion clinics.
d. cannot be restricted under any circumstances.
Q:
Freedom of the press protects:
a. the right to publish information without governmental control.
b. magazine publishers from being told they can"t print obscene material.
c. the public from the publication of offensive material.
d. press premises from being searched by law enforcement.
Q:
As _________, law enforcement officers' speech is protected by the First Amendment only if it is a matter of public concern or unrelated to employment.a. officers of the courtb. members of the Executive branchc. public employeesd. private citizens
Q:
The landmark case in the issue of affirmative action is:
a. United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979).
b. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978).
c. United States v. Paradise (1987).
d. Fullilove v. Klutznick (1980).
Q:
Inmates can sue for violation of their constitutional rights under:
a. USC Section 1983
b. the Civil Rights Act of 1964
c. the Prisoner's Rights Act of 1992
d. the Due Process Act of 1978.
Q:
Delegation of federal immigration enforcement to state and local law enforcement agencies so they may assist in enforcing federal immigration laws is allowed by:
a. Section 1983 of the U.S. Code
b. Congress
c. Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
d. The Department of Justice
Q:
Amenities such as cable television in prison are considered to be inmate:
a. pampering.
b. privileges.
c. rights.
d. sanctions.
Q:
Perhaps one of the most fundamental constitutional rights of prisoners is:
a. access to the courts
b. freedom of religion
c. due process in disciplinary hearings
d. freedom of speech
Q:
Which of the following holds that only the provisions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental to the American legal system are applied to the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
a. The incorporation doctrine
b. The equal justice clause
c. The selective preemption doctrine
d. The civil liberties proclamation
Q:
Sentencing guidelines have reduced:
a. racial disparity.
b. ethnic disparity.
c. death sentences.
d. sentence disparity.
Q:
Among other things, the Fourteenth Amendment:
a. permitted blacks to be citizens of the United States.
b. permitted states to determine the citizenship status of blacks.
c. abolished slavery in the territories.
d. overturned the Emancipation Proclamation.
Q:
If the death penalty is twice as likely to be imposed on an African-American defendant convicted of the same crime as a Caucasian-American, do you think this is grounds to examine the sentences for discrimination? What, if anything, can be done about such results?
Q:
Assume a judge, legislator, or police officer is not prejudiced against minority groups, but they disproportionately punish minority groups through their rulings, laws, or enforcement policies. Should this unintended impact allow us to label the behavior discriminatory? Why or why not?
Q:
Should a person's race, religion, or ethnicity ever be used as a basis for law enforcement action? Why or why not?
Q:
Assume that police suspect Anne Smith of murder and they had DNA evidence at the crime scene that likely belongs to the killer. Law enforcement does not have adequate probable cause to obtain a search warrant to acquire Ms. Smith to produce a DNA sample, but they do know that her brother does not like his sister and would gladly provide a familial DNA sample if asked. DNA samples of people who are related are likely to contain similarities. If the police obtain a DNA sample from her brother even though they have insufficient evidence to implicate Ms. Smith, explain why this procedure might concern civil rights advocates.
Q:
The government is prohibited from unfairly or arbitrarily denying a citizen fundamental or constitutionally protected rights under _____________.
Q:
In 1863, President Lincoln declared free all the slaves in the rebelling states in the ____________________.
Q:
Whether a trial is sufficiently speedy is determined by the length of the delay, the reason for the delay, ________________, and the harm caused.a. court review of the factsb. the prosecution's waiver of the rightc. the relevance of the delayd. the defendant's assertion of this right
Q:
The Supreme Court has interpreted the Sixth Amendment to mean that an accused has the constitutional right to counsel at:
a. every critical stage during a criminal proceeding.
b. any critical stage, excluding post-trial appeals.
c. every critical stage after arraignment.
d. any stage in the criminal investigation.
Q:
In Brewer v. Williams, the Christian Burial Speech case (involving the search for the body of a missing girl), the Supreme Court determined there was:a. an inevitable articulation exception to the Sixth Amendment.b. a deliberate elicitation of an incriminating statement.c. the functional equivalent of interrogation.d. intimidation resulting in an involuntary statement.
Q:
The Star Chamber was:
a. the old Supreme Court chamber located in the U.S. Capitol.
b. an English court that tried people in secret with no regard to due process.
c. a group of highly revered lawyers who drafted the Sixth Amendment.
d. an 1880s theatrical group that taught the public the true meaning of "due process."
Q:
The first prong of the two-pronged test to establish a claim of ineffective counsel requires the defendant to show:
a. representation falling below an objective standard of reasonableness.
b. representation whose incompetence "shocks the conscience."
c. representation falling below community standards of excellence.
d. representation that resulted in an unfavorable outcome.
Q:
Assume that you were a member of a prosecution team that successfully convicted a man of premeditated murder 10 years ago. A new defense attorney for the convicted individual uncovers a witness statement in a case file that suggests that someone else, other than his client, might have committed the killings. The statement was accidentally filed in another case file with a felon with the same last name. An angry member of the victim's family just barged into your office after hearing about the new statement. What would you say?
Q:
Perhaps the most important "speedy trial" issue is whether the defendant was unduly harmed by the delay.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Potential jurors are questioned by both sides to determine impartiality in a process called:
a. peremptory challenging
b. jury nullification
c. voir dire
d. habeus juris