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.
25. As to the suspect's statement, his motion to suppress should be
The suspect moves pretrial to suppress the use as evidence of the weapons seized by the police and of the statement he made.
The police knocked on the suspect's door and called out, «Police. Open up. We have a search warrant.» After a few seconds with no response, the police forced the door open and entered. Hearing noises in the basement, the police ran down there and found the suspect with a large brown suitcase and put handcuffs on the suspect. A search of his person revealed a switchblade knife and a .45-caliber pistol. The suspect cursed the police and said, «You never would have caught me with the stuff if it hadn't been for that lousy snitch Harvey!» The police then fanned out through the house, looking in every room and closet. They found no one else, but one officer found an Uzi automatic weapon in a box on a closet shelf in the suspect's bedroom. In addition to charges relating to the cocaine in the suitcase, the suspect is charged with unlawful possession of weapons.
One day, the police received reliable information that a large brown suitcase with leather straps containing a supply of cocaine had been delivered to the suspect's home and that it would be moved to a distribution point the next morning. The police obtained a valid search warrant to search for and seize the brown suitcase and the cocaine and went to the suspect's house.
The police had, over time, accumulated reliable information that a suspect operated a large cocaine-distribution network, that he and his accomplices often resorted to violence, and that they kept a small arsenal of weapons in his home.
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
A is incorrect. Police officers are allowed to use force to open a door pursuant to a proper search warrant. Moreover, as stated above, the statement itself was voluntarily made.
B is incorrect. A failure to read the Miranda warnings will lead to the suppression of statements only if those statements were obtained as a result of a custodial interrogation. In this case, the suspect, while he may have been in custody, was not subject to interrogation.
D is incorrect. This answer is a misstatement of the law regarding the admissibility of a defendant's confession. The fact that the police's presence was authorized does not, in itself, have a bearing on whether the defendant's statements were made voluntarily. The suspect voluntarily blurted out his statement without being questioned and that statement is admissible against him. His motion to suppress should therefore be denied.