• Brief US v. Al-Marri [11 points]

The test for the scope of consent is what a "typical reasonable person" would have understood the consent to have included in light of the specific facts of the case. Would a "typical reasonable person" understand consent to search a place to include consent to search computers located in that place? Imagine a police officer visits a home in response to a reported burglary. The officer asks the homeowner if he will let the officer "look around for evidence." The homeowner responds, "sure, officer, do whatever you want?" Would a reasonable person understand this exchange to permit the officer to search any computers found inside the home? Does it matter whether the officer is searching for evidence of the burglary or evidence of some other crime? [6 points]

• Brief US v. Buckner. [11 points]
• Brief US v. Andrus. Don't include the dissent in your brief, though you should read it. [11 points]