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.
13. The defendant's objection will most likely be
A defendant was charged with murder. Several witnesses testified that the crime was committed by a person of the defendant's general description who walked with a severe limp. The defendant in fact walks with a severe limp. He objected to a prosecution request that the court order him to walk across the courtroom in order to display his limp to the jury to assist it in determining whether the defendant was the person that the witnesses had seen.
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
Relevant evidence is evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of an action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Fed. R. Evid. 401.
The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the state. The first issue in this Fourth Amendment analysis is to determine if there was a search or seizure. A search occurs when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in something and a state actor violates that right to privacy.
C is correct. The defendant's objection should be overruled because it is permissible for the prosecution to have the defendant walk in the courtroom as demonstrative evidence, as it is relevant and material to the in-court identification. The defendant walking in the courtroom, while incriminating, is not considered testimonial under the rules governing the Fifth Amendment privilege.
A is incorrect. Evidence of how the defendant walks is considered non-testimonial, so the privilege against self-incrimination is not implicated. Just as a court does not violate a defendant's rights against self-incrimination by compelling him to give blood or hair samples, having the defendant show the jury how he walks is non-testimonial and proper to aid in the in-court identification.
B is incorrect. Ordering the defendant to walk in front of the jury is not considered an illegal search, as there was no violation of his reasonable expectation of privacy. Rather, it was done through a valid court order, so even if he had an expectation of privacy as to the way he walks, it still does not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment.
D is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with the wrong reasoning. Although the defendant's objection should be overruled, it is not because a criminal defendant has no legitimate expectation of privacy. A defendant may have a legitimate expectation of privacy in his walk, but the court may properly order him to give such a demonstration. Because having the defendant walk across the courtroom does not require the defendant to give testimonial evidence against himself, and because it would be done pursuant to a court order, the defendant's objection should be denied.