Victim reported being sexually assaulted, and said that she didn't know who her attacker was. In the course of the investigation, Officer O investigated Defendant, who was in the area on the night of the crime. Based on a hunch, Officer O decided to see if Defendant would answer some questions. Officer O asked if defendant would come to a diner near defendant's apartment for an interview. Defendant said he would, and arrived at the diner for the meeting. At the diner, Officer O asked defendant if he would consent to the taking of a DNA sample for comparison to DNA evidence collected at the scene of the assault. Defendant said no. Defendant was nervous during the interview, rubbing his arms and the side of the chair. Soon after the interview was over and the defendant had left the diner, Officer O took swabs of the chair in an attempt to collect the defendant's DNA. The police submitted those swabs to the crime lab for DNA analysis, which revealed that the DNA extracted from the swabs matched DNA samples investigators had collected from the scene of the assault. Further investigation ensued and, eventually, Petitioner was charged with sexual assault and related offenses. What level of suspicion, if any, did the police officer need in order to ask for an interview? Question 2 options: An officer needs reasonable suspicion to ask for an interview. An officer does not need any level of suspicion to ask for an interview. An officer needs a hunch to ask for an interview. An officer needs probable cause to ask for an interview. Did Officer O have this level of suspicion? Question 3 options: Yes, because Officer O had a hunch that the defendant had committed the crime. Yes, because Officer O did not need any level of suspicion. No, because Officer O did not have probable cause that defendant committed the crime. No, because Officer O did not have reasonable suspicion that defendant committed the crime. Was Officer O's collection of DNA evidence from the chair a search under the Fourth Amendment? Question 4 options: Yes, because the defendant had a subjective expectation of privacy in his DNA. No, because the defendant's expectation of privacy in his DNA on the chair was not reasonable. 5. What level of suspicion did the police officer need in order to collect the DNA evidence from the chair? Question 5 options: An officer needs probable cause in this scenario. An officer needs consent in this scenario. An officer needs reasonable suspicion in this scenario. An officer does not need any suspicion in this scenario. Yes, because the collection of DNA is always a search. No, Because collecting DNA is never a search. 6. Did Officer O have this level of suspicion? Question 6 options: No, because officer O did not have probable cause that defendant committed the crime. Yes, because the officer did not need any level of suspicion. Yes, because officer O had a hunch that the defendant had committed the crime. No, because officer O did not have reasonable suspicion that defendant committed the crime