Answered step by step
Verified Expert Solution
Link Copied!

Question

1 Approved Answer

The Tempe branch of Wells Fargo Bank was robbed by three masked gunmen, and for a month the Tempe Police had no leads on the

The Tempe branch of Wells Fargo Bank was robbed by three masked gunmen, and for a month the Tempe Police had no leads on the identity of the bank robbers. Unrelated to the bank robbery investigation, police officer Matt Murdock learned from an informant that Wilson Fisk was selling illegal weapons out of his apartment. Because the informant had proved unreliable in the past, this tip didn't give Officer Murdock probable cause to obtain a warrant to search Fisk's apartment, or to arrest Fisk. Nonetheless, Officer Murdock proceeded without a warrant because he knew he couldn't get one. At a time when he knew Fisk was not home, Officer Murdock broke into Fisk's apartment and began searching for weapons. While searching, Officer Murdock discovered a letter in plain view written by Vladimir to Fisk, which read, "When Anatoly, Nubo, and I robbed the Tempe Wells Fargo Bank last month, we got away with $155,000 in loot, so I'd like to spend some of this money on one of the weapons you're selling." Officer Murdock immediately realized this letter was the key to the Tempe bank robbery, so he took it and left Fisk's apartment. Solely because of this letter, Vladimir was charged with robbing the Wells Fargo Bank. At trial, the prosecution sought to introduce the letter into evidence. Vladimir objected on the grounds the letter was seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Will the judge exclude the letter from evidence?

Group of answer choices

A. Yes, because Officer Murdock's break-in, made without probable cause and without a warrant, was clearly illegal and a violation of Fisk's Fourth Amendment rights.

B. Yes, because the exclusionary rule allows evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment to be suppressed (excluded) from evidence at trial.

C. No, because Vladimir does not have a possessory interest in Fisk's apartment, was not present there, and did not own the letter once it was sent, he does not have standing to object to introduction of the letter into evidence.

D. No, because even though Officer Murdock broke into Fisk apartment, the plain view doctrine allows the letter to be admitted into evidence.

Step by Step Solution

There are 3 Steps involved in it

Step: 1

blur-text-image

Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions

See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success

Step: 2

blur-text-image

Step: 3

blur-text-image

Ace Your Homework with AI

Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance

Get Started

Recommended Textbook for

Law Express Human Rights

Authors: Claire De Than

5th Edition

1292210214, 978-1292210216

More Books

Students also viewed these Law questions