Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic
Ok, so say a person was stopped for speeding, something small like 5 mph over the limit. A ticket is in order, but instead the police arrest the driver, and then search the car and find drugs, or a body, or stolen mechandise.
Do we say, the police officer was wrong to make an arrest for a speeding ticket, but the search was legal because there was then cause to search the car.
Use the same scenario, only this time the driver was going 1mph over, and had been the subject of interest in a crime, and this arrest was used to seize evidence that the police had been unable to obtain a warrant to search for.
I know that those circumstances don't necessarily match those of the case, but they are close. My question is where does the line get drawn?
And congrats on school and good luck with the bar exam.
|
I know we talked about something like this during the semester. I'm going to withhold commenting further until sometime next week when I cram all this info into my head again. These are really good examples and as you're showing, when the SC starts making exceptions on admissible evidence, it can be a very slippery slope. I definitely want to revisit this thread next weak after I've boned up a little.