During a rape investigation officers received information from the victim describing the suspect and the weapon he used during the crime. The officers went to a suspect's home to look for the hand gun described by the victim in her statement. At the time the suspect was not in custody and was said to be at work when the officers were planning to arrive at his residence. Prior to arriving at the home, officers were informed that the suspect lived with his grandmother. The officers did not receive a search warrant to enter the home, but were hoping to receive consent from the grandmother to enter the home. Upon arriving at the home, one of the five officers went to the door and was met by the grandmother. When the officer announced that he had a search warrant to search the house (which he did not), the grandmother responded affirmatively and allowed the officers to enter and begin searching the premises. Officers searched several parts of the home including the kitchen, the suspect's bedroom bathroom, and the living area. The officers then found a small handgun matching the description given by the victim in the case. The evidence was seized from the suspect's bedroom. After finding the handgun, additional evidence was seized from the suspect's bedroom. At that point, the officers drove to the suspect's place of work and arrested him. All of the evidence taken from the home was used at the suspect's trial. The suspect was subsequently convicted of rape.

1. What are the elements of a legal 4thAmendment search?
2. When the officers arrived at the home, did they need a search warrant? Why or why not?
3. Should the small handgun have been admissible in court? Why or why not?
4. Should the additional evidence have been admissible in court? Why or why not?