1. Police officers arrived at grants home to investigate

PLEASE for the Off Track Betting s cmint parker .responsibilitiesjogg PART 1 - Understand on. One of her of money in a local bank he daily receive in dethe and the vehicle. However, Copeit the d my in debt, Furenya devise cause she soof ed this practer CHAPTER S . P whenthe driver and his used drugs teenagersly. he ordered them all was mart stop. She coniditors made a surpet Becan takeeditorthe stator's account teaccords, over a year until the ar uniting parlor vered a be warrantless search v searched the car's into murtz then placed all the teenagers of shortage was d drugs. Sch inferior. and di at crime could rest. Was the search that Schmutz renya, she was arrested. With what cried to not within reaching fateh the ally When nducted legal? Fuller charged? described below, identify the 2001 FED App. 90679 GillettTime How can a police officer determine whether a crime or crimes committed by the person tivity. police officertion ine -under the influence" A police 9. For each her truck down Main Street Lou Cates and interviewed , the 6. irman was "without werviolation, Pu and di underlinecrack driver was agreed with sk . A fuel truck than 100,000 ment agencies and then find realized that the god sent served the fer in his squadshe ware human over, placed her and therefore asked a friething Furmaneight police station more this to gover but rate Prof having o and jewelry and embraced deliver che fuel at cut rat her to the we her shoes and jewel ember tired of having obscenity "vestigation. The offsite tal took her mug shot hour, after which selling band meanother over the head w pockets. OH cell for abeige and releasbelt layerbelt Alled at hand membres Weapons at any time duf did ne ed on bond. ophone stand, causing ith the interview took place on the the she was treated with violins contest to the the other ba base of his micronda nt brain dan with entering the Larder Cates ry stressed te when She Wanor. She Plead$100 fine. Furman then misdemeanor and not the actions orth of the town, the ermanent charged handgun, jewelry, coins submither own freeterrieww filed suit, allee police violated her unreasonab Higgins Wand takenat over ed a Conway Ice residence and her chair andt differ Amendment right and bonds valued at over ght to be free f es forbade police caped prisoner enteredat the S o magicended that rules forreas d a gun at the salesperson, The interview lasted sered seizure. She co officers to make warrantless misdemeanor arrests d. beam store, Pont and demanded all the money in the cash manager, filled out and signste iling narcoti Cates recount Orrent in cases of breach breach of the peace rcotics, include e. Is Furman correice stole several Driscoll, a store manager nexistent employees and then narcotics from a numb 7. W towing . a student at Banes Collegesports locker time cards for nonexistent s. Two months new football helmets the college sport cashed the paychecks himself. cted by a gra room. He sold very low price to the helmets for a very 10. A police officer on routine patrol in fer police car orney moved to di Favor, the owner of a local sporting goods store the newspaper about the reading an article in the news at about 3 A.M. received a call over the police radio glary in progress at a pizza parlor made to the officers intel and later PENTIUM theft, the owner of the store was quite sure the describing a burglary ine helmets he purchased from sed from Walkman were the ones in her patrol zone. When she arrived at the pizza mistrial . The attor en stolen. Nevertheless, he did not notify Parlor, a short distance from where she received the were made during call, she spotted a person who was getting into a without the ben either the police or the appro priate college attorney claime personnel that he had bought the helmets. Instead, car parked next to the pizza parlor. If the police given whenever he marked them for sale at a special price and officer wished to make an arrest in the belief that placed them on a shelf with other football gear. this person had committed the robbery, what would a suspect who any other circ Although he paid Walkman for the football be the basis for the arrest? his or her fre helmets, is Favor liable for the commission of any The judge i crime? Is Walkman? Explain. was warran convicted. Cases for Review appeals co officer immediately arrested Grant, handcuffed States v. 1. Police officers arrived at Grant's home to investigate him, and locked him in the back seat of the police 3. When Ar a tip that Grant's residence was being used to sell car. The police officer then went back and searched Interna drugs. At the time, Grant was not at home, but he did arrive home in his car while police were Grant's car, which, of course, was 30 feet away. the Phi questioning a man and woman parked in front of The search revealed a gun and a bag of cocaine in checkp the house about possession of drug paraphernalia. the pocket of a jacket on the backseat. Grant was laptop He w He parked at the end of the driveway, got out of his charged with possession of a narcotic drug for sale car, and shut the door. One of the police officers, and paraphernalia (i.e., the plastic bag in which scan who was some 30 feet away, called to Grant, who the cocaine was found). Grant moved to suppress U.S dis responded by going to the patrol car. The police the evidence seized in the car on the grounds that an 41 An Indictment 5/ Twelve varg ultra Round sile GripF 10 F11 F12 Back Space ploved as the manager of r of a state- or, the Off Track Betting her responsibilities was to ojots of money in a local bank. CHAPTER 3 . Personal, Business, Cyber Crimes and the Am why in debt, Furenya devised a the warrantless search violated his Fourth Amendment rights-more specificall ican Criminal Justice System com each deposit to pay her the continued this practice for pecifically that the police had no right to search the car since it was not within reaching distance at the time of his warrant to legally seize the laptop, and Arnold filed state auditors made a surprise a motion in a U.S. district court to suppress the parlor's accounting records. arrest. Was Grant correct? (Electronic Citation: evidence based on his Fourth Amendment right discovered and traced to 2001 FED App. 0067P 6th Cir) . As part of an investigation into illegal narcotics against an unreasonable search and seizure of sted. With what crime could activity, police officers went to the home of Cindy information stored on his laptop computer. In Lou Cates and interviewed her about her response to this motion, the government invoked the "border doctrine," giving them ribed below, identify the involvement in buying and selling narcotics. Cates ing them a legitimate right to conduct a search of the laptop. This right tted by the person had realized that the officers wanted to interview her and therefore asked a friend to arrange the was based on a prior precedent (U.S. v. Ra which stated that searches made at the border are s charged with skimming meeting, stating her desire to cooperate with the reasonable simply because they occur at the border allons from gasoline investigation. The officers drove an unmarked car, and that international American airports are the at agencies and then were not in uniform, and did not draw their equivalent of a border. Reference was also made to ate prices. weapons at any time during the interview. The a history of searches of closed containers such as interview took place on the porch of her house, and briefcases, purses, pictures, film, and other graphic ed of having obscenities Cates was free to leave when she so desired. The material that have traditionally been searched at the band member, struck over the head with the officers stressed to Cates that whether or not she border without particularized suspicion being submitted to the interview was a choice that had to necessary. The Ninth Circuit Court backed the and, causing be of her own free will. Cates never indicated a government (reversed the decision of the district desire not to talk. At different times, she got up court favoring Arnold) based on the Ramsey from her chair and entered the house, unescorted. precedent and the fact that there was no precedent entering the Larder The interview lasted several hours. During the to declare when a border search should be deemed dgun, jewelry, coins, interview, Cates recounted her activities buying and unreasonable. Arnold appealed to the U.S. Supreme .000. selling narcotics, including that she purchased Court, but the Court refused to hear his appeal. Do you agree with the Ninth Circuit Court's decision a Conway Ice narcotics from a number of individuals and resold to rule against Arnold? (523 F.3d 941 (9th Cir)) at the salesperson, to others. Two months after the interview, Cates 4. Russello was a member of an arson ring consisting in the cash register. was indicted by a grand jury. During her trial, her of arsonists, insurance adjusters, and property d out and signed attorney moved to dismiss any statements she had owners. A group member would buy a building, the loyees and then made to the officers during her interview with them arsonists would burn it, and the insurance adjusters and later in the trial asked the court to declare a would help the owner recover inflated insurance mistrial. The attorney argued that these statements awards. The group members would then share in n her police car the proceeds. During one period of time, the group the police radio were made during custodial interrogation and without the benefit of Miranda warnings. The burned several buildings. Russello, who owned a a pizza parlor attorney claimed that Miranda warnings must be professional building in Tampa, Florida, arranged given whenever law enforcement officers interrogate for his building to be burned and then settled with I at the pizza a suspect who has been arrested or whenever under the insurance company, receiving $350,000, the he received the highest amount possible. Russello in turn invested tting into a any other circumstances the suspect is deprived of the money in legitimate enterprises. The federal the police his or her freedom of action in any significant way. government brought criminal RICO charges against belief that The judge in the lower court ruled that no mistrial Russello. A U.S. district court found Russello guilty was warranted in this case, and Cates was and ordered forfeiture of the insurance proceeds. what would convicted. She appealed her case. Should the A U.S. court of appeals affirmed the lower court appeals court uphold Cates's conviction? (United udgment. Russello appealed to the U.S. Supreme States v. Cates, U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Nebraska) Court. Are the insurance proceeds obtained by 3. When Arnold arrived at the Los Angeles Russello subject to forfeiture under the criminal International Airport after returning from a trip to RICO statute? (Russello v. United States, 464 U.S. the Philippines, he proceeded through the 104) 5. Two police officers were patrolling an area where uffed checkpoint at customs with his luggage, including a drug trafficking had been reported. They spotted e police laptop computer and several computer accessories. an automobile driven by Johnson circling in the searched He was requested to turn on the computer for area and observed that the car had a broken taillight. The officers pulled the vehicle over and way. scanning. Upon an inspection, special agents from advised Johnson that he was being stopped for the ine in U.S. Homeland Security and Customs Enforcement broken taillight, which violated a state statute. The was discovered numerous images of child pornography officer then discovered that Johnson was driving or sale and information about an attempt to engage in with a suspended driver's license. He was placed illicit sexual conduct with a person under 18 years ch of age in the Philippines. Security had obtained a ess hatType here to search hp Esc F1 F2 F3 F4 F& F10 8 76 PART 1 - Understanding Your Legal Environment authority to enter into contracts with suppliers and le to provide the necessary materialand under arrest and given a pat-down search. This "habilitate houses in search revealed crack cocaine in the defendant's h of the trunk revealed that contracting with the suppliers and tradespeople pocket; a search of the tru they used their positions to extract a 10 percent marijuana was present. oridence on the grounds dence on the ment back on all contracts they awarded. What a motion to suppress that the police officers had no right to stop and crime have Dixon and Hinton committed? (Dixon rch his vehicle for a broken taillight. Was Johnson and Hinton v. United States, 465 U.S. 482) son, 324 F. 2d 263) correct? (United States d by an acquaintance, who 9. Ryburn and Zepeda, police officers, responded to a Bower was encouraged by an ac call from the principal at Jefferson High School in was actually an informer, to sell cocaine to a Burbank, California. The principal informed them government undercover agent. The agent then that Vincent Huff, a student at the school was arrested Bower for the possession and sale o rumored to have written a letter threatening to drug. Bower claimed entrapment as a defense. During the trial, evidence was introduced to show "shoot up" the school. He asked the police officers to investigate the rumor. They started by Tort Law: T conclusively that Bower was in the business of selling cocaine and that the sale to the undercover interviewing several students at the school. The agent was not really induced by the agent but was officers additionally learned that Vincent had been actually just another opportunity that presented absent from school for two days because he was and Cyber itself to Bower. Is the defense of entrapment valid in frequently subject to bullying. The officers decided this case? (United States v. Bower, 575 F.2d 499 to continue the investigation by interviewing U.S. Court of Appeals) Vincent at his home. They rang the doorbell but no 7. Ward, a former employee of ISD, a computer one answered although Vincent and his mother were inside. Vincent and his mother finally came to CHAPTER PREVIEW company, was employed by UCC, a competing computer service company. Ward was charged with the door and the officers advised Vincent that they obtaining trade secrets illegally through the use of a were here to discuss the threat to discuss the threats An Overview of Tort La computer terminal. Using a UCC data telephone, he had made. The officers then asked if they could Classification of Torts Ward dialed a secret number and gained access on continue the discussion inside, but Mrs. Huff Intentional Torts his terminal to an ISD program without authority to refused. Officer Ryburn then asked Mrs. Huff if Assault and Battery do so. He then got a printout of the ISD program. there were any guns in the house. Mrs. Huff False Imprisonment The ISD program gave ISD an advantage over its responded by running into the house. Ryburn Infliction of Emotional competitors, including UCC. When charged with became cautious not knowing what Mrs. Huff was Defamation: The Lib theft, Ward claimed he stole nothing tangible and trying to hide, and followed her into the house. Invasion of Privacy therefore that no crime had been committed. He Vincent then entered the house behind Officer Wrongful Death contended that he only caused impulses to be Ryburn, followed by Officer Zedapa. No guns were Malicious Prosecut transmitted over the phone and onto a screen and found. All parties then ended up in the living room Fraud that, once he did that, getting a printout was not theft. Does making a printout of secret information and discussed the case. The police officers Interference with taken from another's computer constitute computer concluded that the rumor about Vincent was false, Trespass theft? (Ward v. Superior Court, Alameda County Cal and they reported that conclusion to the school Conversion 3 Computer Law Service Rptr., 206 Cal. Super. Ct.) principal. Mrs. Huff then brought an action against Nuisance 8. Arthur Dixon, executive director, and James the officers alleging that they violated her Fourth Theft of Trade Hinton, housing coordinator for United Amendment rights by entering their home without Neighborhoods Inc. (UNI), were in charge of a warrant. Should Mrs. Huff be successful in Defenses to administering federal funds received from the court action? (Ryburn, At Al v. George R. Huff, Unintentio Department of Housing and Urban Development Et Al. on petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit) Defense (HUD) for the city of Peoria, Illinois. They had the Lawsuit Contribut Compara