Officer Hassall of the Tacoma Police Department was investigating a series of burglaries allegedly committed by Mac Miscreant, an employee of Spikes Motorcycle Repair Shop. Hassall went to Spikes 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 Hassall to search a locker Spike let Miscreant use in which Hassall found burglar tools and property listed by the police as stolen. Hassall then demanded that he be permitted to conduct a complete search of the entire premises. Spike once again refused to grant consent, but Hassall nevertheless conducted a complete search of the premises. During his search, Hassall broke into a locked storage room and found a laboratory manufacturing fentanyl pills for which Spike did not have a valid prescription from a licensed medical professional. Spike was cited for violation of state narcotics laws. $1.$Is the fentanyl discovered by Officer Hassall admissible at Spikes trial? A$.$No$,$ the fentanyl is not admissible due to the absence of a warrantB.Yes, Spikes business premises are not protected from warrantless searches by the policeC.No$,$ Hassall had an unlimited right to search but no right to seize any items from the premises D$.$Yes, the stolen property gave Hassall probable cause to conduct a warrantless search of the entire premises$2.$In ruling upon Spikes motion to prevent use of the fentanyl at trial, 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 residencesB.business premises are protected from unreasonable search and seizure to the same extent as private residences C$.$business premises are protected from unreasonable search and seizure to a lesser degree than private residencesD.business premises are not protected from any type of search and seizure$3.$If Hassall had detected the drug laboratory at Spikes repair shop through use of heat sensing technology without physically entering the premises or obtaining a warrant, the court would likely A$.$prevent the use of the fentanyl as the use of heat seeking technology is a search for which a warrant is required B$.$allow the fentanyl into evidence as the use of heat sensing technology is a search but does not require a warrantC.prevent the use of the fentanyl in court as Hassall did not have probable cause to conduct a warrantless searchD.allow the fentanyl into evidence as the use of heat seeking technology is not a search $4.$If Hassall applied for a search warrant for the repair shop, Hassall would be required to prove A$.$it was beyond a reasonable doubt that there was evidence of further criminal activity located on the premisesB.nothing as search warrants are automatically issued by judges upon the request of the policeC.there was clear and convincing proof that there was evidence of further criminal activity located on the premisesD.there was reasonable suspicion that there was evidence of further criminal activity located on the premises $5.$ If Hassall found a cellular telephone during his search, would he have to apply for a search warrant before reviewing the telephones contents?A$.$Yes, unless the cellular telephone service provider consented to warrantless access by the policeB.Yes, because the police must obtain a search warrant before accessing the contents of cellular telephonesC.No$,$ because owners of cellular telephones have no expectation of privacy with respect to their devicesD.No$,$ because the right to access to the contents of the cellular telephone belongs exclusively to the service provider $6.$ Are the burglar tools and stolen property discovered by Office Hassall admissible at Miscreants trial?A$.$No$,$ because Miscreant did not consent to the search of his lockerB.Yes, because the burglar tools and stolen property were in plain view once Hassall opened the lockerC.No$,$ unless Hassall was in hot pursuit of MiscreantD.Yes, because the locker was on business premises owned by Spike which allowed Spike to consent to the search$7.$Are the fentanyl, burglar tools, and stolen property admissible at Spike and Miscreants trials if Spike failed to respond to Hassalls request to search the business premises and locker? A$.$Yes as to the business premises but no as the contents of the lockerB.Yes, because Spikes silence must be interpreted as consent for searches of the business premises and lockerC.No$,$ because Spikes silence does not constitute consent to search the business premises or the locker D$.$No as to the business premises but yes as to the contents of the locker $8.$If Spike and his son Spike Jr$.$ were both charged with possession of fentanyl, which of the following statements correctly summarizes the coverage of the Fifth Amendments right to be free from self$-$incrimination?A$.$Spike could invoke his right to be free from self$-$incrimination on his own behalf and on behalf of Spike Jr$.$ as a blood relativeB.Spike Jr$.$ could invoke his right to be free from self$-$incrimination on his own behalf and on behalf of Spike as a blood relativeC.Spike and Spike Jr$.$ could not invoke their right to be free from self$-$incrimination in this caseD.Spike and Spike Jr$.$ could invoke their right to be free from self$-$incrimination on their own behalf but not on behalf of one another $9.$Which of the following statements correctly summarizes Spikes utilization of the Fifth Amendment after his arrest?A$.$Spike must inform the interrogating police officer that he elects to remain silentB.Spikes right to remain silent only applies to statements that the interrogating police officer determines to be incriminatingC.Spike does not need to take any action as the right to remain silent attached automatically upon his arrestD.Spike must sign a sworn affidavit stating that he chooses to remain silent for the Fifth Amendment protection against self$-$incrimination to be applicable $10.$Which of the following statements correctly summarizes Spikes utilization of the Fifth Amendment if he chooses to be silent after making incriminating statements to an interrogating police officer?A$.$Spikes earlier statements constitute a waiver of his right to be free from self$-$incrimination, and he must continue to answer questions posed by the interrogating police officerB.Spikes right to remain silent only applies to statements that the interrogating police officer determines to be incriminatingC. Spike may refrain from making further statements to the interrogating police officer even after making incriminating statements D$.$The interrogating police officer can decide in his or her discretion whether to allow Spike to become silent$11.$Which of the following statements correctly summarizes the right to regulate commerce by the federal and state governments?A$.$The federal government has the exclusive right to regulate all commerceB.The state governments have the exclusive right to regulate all commerceC.The federal government regulates foreign and interstate commerce but has no right to regulate intrastate commerceD.The federal government regulates all types of commerce that affect foreign and interstate commerce and state governments may regulate intrastate commerce utilizing their police powers $12.$Commercial speech is best described asA.the equivalent of political speech pursuant to the First Amendment to the U$.$S$.$ ConstitutionB.subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictionsC.not protected by the U$.$S$.$ ConstitutionD.only protective of advertising designed to attract customers to commercial businesses