Need help legal aspects

EXAMINATION QUESTIONS Officer Hassle of the Atlanta Police Department was investigating a series of burglaries allegedly committed by Mac Miscreant, an employee of Spike's Motorcycle Repair Shop. Hassle went to Spike's place of business and requested that he be permitted to search the premises. Spike refused to grant permission for a general search of the premises but allowed Hassle to search a locker Spike let Miscreant use in which Hassle found burglar tools and property listed by the police as stolen. Hassle then demanded that he be permitted to conduct a complete search of the entire premises. Spike once again refused to grant consent, but Hassle nevertheless conducted a complete search of the premises. During his search, Hassle broke into a locked storage room and found one thousand marijuana plants. Spike was cited for violation of state narcotics laws. 1. Are the marijuana plants discovered by Officer Hassle admissible at Spike's trial? A. No, Hassle had an unlimited right to search but no right to seize any items from the premises B. Yes, Spike's business premises are not protected from warrantless searches by the police C. No, the marijuana plants are not admissible due to the absence of a warrant D. Yes, the stolen property gave Hassle probable cause to conduct a search of the entire premises 2. In seeking to prevent the jury from hearing evidence of the marijuana plants, Spike would argue for the application of A. the Fifth Amendment right to be free from self-incriminatin B. the Fifth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable government seizures of property C. the exclusionary rule through the Fourth Amendment D. the right to confront witnesses and present a legal defense pursuant to the Sixth Amendment 3. In ruling upon Spike's motion to prevent use of the marijuana plants, the court will start with the proposition stated in Marshall v. Barlows, Inc. that A. business premises are protected from unreasonable search and seizure to a greater extent than private residences B, business premises are not protected from any type of search and seizure C, business premises are protected from unreasonable search and seizure to a lesser degree than private residences D, business premises are protected from unreasonable search and seizure to the same extent as private residences