Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
1. If the driver moves to suppress the use as evidence of the marijuana and cocaine found in the search of the truck, the court should
After completing their search of the driver and the truck, the police went over to the young woman and searched her purse. In her purse, they found a small quantity of heroin. Both the driver and the young woman were arrested and charged with unlawful possession of narcotics.
The only passenger was a young woman who was in the back of the truck. The police saw her get out and stand at a nearby bus stop. They stopped the truck and searched the driver. In the pocket of the driver's jacket, the police found a small bottle of pills that they recognized as narcotics. They then broke open a locked toolbox attached to the flatbed of the truck and found a small sealed envelope inside. They opened it and found marijuana. They also found a quantity of cocaine in the glove compartment.
Police received information from an undercover police officer that she had just seen two men (whom she described) in a red pickup truck selling marijuana to schoolchildren near the city's largest high school. A few minutes later, two police officers saw a pickup truck fitting the description a half block from the high school. The driver of the truck matched the description of one of the men described by the undercover officer.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
D is correct. An undercover police officer reported that the driver of the vehicle was selling marijuana and gave a description of the truck and the driver. This information gave the two police officers the probable cause needed to stop and search a vehicle matching the description. The automobile exception allows the warrantless search of the vehicle, including any container in the vehicle that may contain the evidence sought, and the belongings of the people inside the vehicle. The police were thus constitutionally permitted to search the glove compartment, the locked toolbox, and the sealed envelope for more evidence of marijuana. The motion should be denied as to both substances.
A is incorrect. Neither the marijuana nor the cocaine should be suppressed because, under the automobile exception, the police had probable cause and thus could conduct a warrantless search of the entire vehicle, including every container, before properly discovering both substances.
B is incorrect. The marijuana and the cocaine, not just the cocaine, were properly discovered in the course of a search pursuant to the automobile exception. The police had probable cause to believe drugs were in the car or on the driver's person, and therefore, were constitutionally permitted to search the entire car, including every container.
C is incorrect. As stated above, the marijuana and the cocaine, not just the marijuana, were properly discovered in the course of a search under the automobile exception.