Analysis and Application: Police Encounters with Suspects and Evidence
6/18/2011 Instructor: Kurt Austin Zimmer | By: Bieri April | CJ227-08 Criminal procedure | Unit 2: analysis and application: police encounters with suspects and evidence |
CJ227-08 Criminal procedure | Unit 2: analysis and application: police encounters with suspects and evidence |
1. Did officer Smith have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of this vehicle?
Officer Smith had reasonable suspicion which is based on the totality of the circumstances as understood by those versed in the field of law enforcement; it is commonly described as something more than a hunch but less than probable cause.(quiz law) The answer is yes, Officer Smith did have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of the vehicle. Because the taillight appeared to be broken which is a traffic law violation. Also officer Smith remembered a vehicle that matched the general description of the car that he stopped. This car fit the description of the vehicle that was suspected in a recent roadside killing of another police officer.
2. Was the “pat-down” of the driver legal?
An officer may order a motorist out of a car to ensure the officer’s safety.(quiz law) The police officer may conduct a pat-down search to ensure there are no weapons.(quiz law) The “pat-down” is a quick search of a person’s being in order to determine if any weapons are present. Officer Smith’s pat-down was legal because it was necessary to ensure his safety. Officer Smith conducted a Terry frisk which requires a reasonable suspicion the suspect is armed. Since the general description of the vehicle that killed another officer fit the same vehicle Officer Smith pulled over he had the right to pat-down the driver for his own safety.
3. Did exigent
CJ227-08 Criminal procedure | Unit 2: analysis and application: police encounters with suspects and evidence |
1. Did officer Smith have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of this vehicle?
Officer Smith had reasonable suspicion which is based on the totality of the circumstances as understood by those versed in the field of law enforcement; it is commonly described as something more than a hunch but less than probable cause.(quiz law) The answer is yes, Officer Smith did have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of the vehicle. Because the taillight appeared to be broken which is a traffic law violation. Also officer Smith remembered a vehicle that matched the general description of the car that he stopped. This car fit the description of the vehicle that was suspected in a recent roadside killing of another police officer.
2. Was the “pat-down” of the driver legal?
An officer may order a motorist out of a car to ensure the officer’s safety.(quiz law) The police officer may conduct a pat-down search to ensure there are no weapons.(quiz law) The “pat-down” is a quick search of a person’s being in order to determine if any weapons are present. Officer Smith’s pat-down was legal because it was necessary to ensure his safety. Officer Smith conducted a Terry frisk which requires a reasonable suspicion the suspect is armed. Since the general description of the vehicle that killed another officer fit the same vehicle Officer Smith pulled over he had the right to pat-down the driver for his own safety.
3. Did exigent
References: The Lectric Law Library’s Legal Lexicon 1995-2011 Quiz law www.quizlaw.com