Facts: D was stopped for a faulty brake light. Ds boyfriend had a syringe in his shirt pocket. WHen questioned about it, the boyfriend admitted that he uses it to take drugs. the officer asked for identification which the D falsely identified herself and stated that she did not have any id on her. Because of the bf’s admission of using the syringe for drugs the police searched the car for illegal drug possessions. In the backseat the officer found Ds purse in the backseat. The id in her purse correctly identified her. the officer also founf a brown puch and a wallet container. D admitted to owning the wallet container which had a syringe used for drugs and drug contraband. there was very little drugs for a felony conviction. The officer found
Garrett, B. L. (n.d.). The Substance of False Confessions. Criminal Justice Collection. Retrieved November 23, 2010, from find.galegroup.com.uproxy.library.dc-uoit.ca/gtx/retrieve.do?contentSet=IAC-Documents&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&qrySerId=Locale%28en%2C%2C%29%3AFQE%3D%28su%2CNone%2C28%29%22Wrongful+Convictions+%28Law%29%22%3AAnd%3ALQE%3D%28RE%2CNone%2C3%29ref%24&sgHitCo
Bermudez told me the purse did not belong to her. I asked Bermudez what was the can she dropped and she said, “I was drinking. The can belongs to me.” I asked Bermudez if there is anything illegal inside of the purse that I needed to know about and she said, “No.” I told Bermudez to sit in the backseat of my vehicle and she complied. I approached and grabbed the salmon colored purse I saw Bermudez drop. Laying on the ground next to the salmon colored purse was 1 24oz Black Berry Steel Reserve Alcoholic beverage (half full). I grabbed both of the items and returned to the hood of my vehicle. I searched the purse and found several large blue trash bags inside. I searched the trash bags and found 1 used methamphetamine pipe. I asked Bermudez if the methamphetamine pipe belonged to her and she said, “No.” I asked Bermudez if she uses any drugs and she said, “No. I found that
Application/Analysis: While using a previous case DePasquale v. State 757.1988, that court held in this case that the defendant was not entrapped when he robbed that undercover female decoy. The court held that the officers committed no misconduct, they also put five factors that show that Miller intended to steal from the decoy. The fact that Mill asked Officer Leavitt for money first and after Leavitt told him no; Miller took it upon himself to take the money away. This act was enough to show Miller intentionally committed larceny, the court held that Miller was not
The police responded to a tip that a home was being used to sell drugs. When they arrived at the home, Gant answered the door and stated that he expected the owner to return home later. The officers left and did a record check of Gant and found that his driver’s license had been suspended and there was a warrant for his arrest. The officers returned to the house later that evening and Gant wasn’t there. Gant returned shortly and was recognized by officers. He parked at the end of the driveway and exited his vehicle and was placed under arrest 10 feet from his car and was placed in the back of the squad car immediately. After Gant was secured, two officers searched his car and found a gun and a bag of cocaine.
I arrived on scene at 17:10 hours. A juvenile was standing under the carport beside a white Dodge Durango. The reporting party, Kaella D. Barners (F/B, DOB: 05/04/1977), exited the front door when she seen deputies arrive. I approached the juvenile, Katera Edwina Barners (F/B, DOB: 08/29/2000). Katera was calm and cooperative. Katera had been upset at her mother. I observed an end table on the hood of the vehicle. I asked Katera if she put it there. Katera said she threw it there in attempt to damage the vehicle.
Facts: The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and states that an officer to have both probable cause and a search warrant in order to search a person or their property. There are several exceptions to this requirement. One exception to this is when an officer makes an arrest; the officer can search an arrestee and the area within his immediate control without first obtaining a search warrant. This case brings forth the extent of an officer’s power in searching an arrestee’s vehicle after he has been arrested and placed in the back of a patrol car. On August 25, 1999, the police responded to an anonymous tip of drug activity at a particular residence. When they arrived on scene, Rodney Gant answered the door and identified himself. He told police that the owner of the house was not home but was coming back later that evening. Police later discovered that Rodney Gant had a warrant for his arrest for driving with a suspended license. The officers came back to the home later that evening and arrested two individuals. After both individuals were handcuffed and placed in the back of patrol cars, Gant pulled up at the house driving a vehicle. When he stepped out of his car, he was arrested for driving with a suspended license. After Gant was handcuffed and placed in the back of a third patrol car, officers proceeded to search Gant’s car. During their search they found a gun in the car and a bag of cocaine in a jacket pocket laying on the backseat of the car Gant was driving. Gant was charged with possession of the cocaine. He fought to have the evidence found in his car suppressed at trial because, he claimed, the search of his car had been unreasonable. Gant’s motion was denied and Gant was convicted...
When officer Faultless seized the phones of Rahten and Ruhmoan both were secured then secured by officer faultless. Officer faultless unable to unlock the phones noticing Ruhmoan’s phone required his thumb print to open and forcefully used his thumb to unlock his phone. Once unlocked the officer noticed information from a text about a gun being in their car. This lead to the officer searching the car and discovering a gun. The gun was located in the passenger’s driver’s seat well out of the view of both
In the early hours of the night on June 1993, Whren and Brown were driving the Pathfinder truck in a high drug region. In the same locale, two plainclothes police officers with unmarked police car were mandated with the task to patrol the area in the District of Columbia. It’s at this juncture that the police officers observed that the Pathfinder truck in which Whren and Brown were driving had stopped at a crossing stop sign for an extraordinarily long time (Whren v the United States, 1996). Without even signaling, Whren turned right sharply and sped off on realizing that the police officers had made a U-turn towards them. Similarly, as this was in violation of the traffic rules the police officers raced after them and stopped them at the side of the road at a red light. Notwithstanding, Whren was found to hold two plastic bags of what seemed like crack cocaine in his hand when the police came to the vehicle. Whren and Brown were thus incarcerated on federal drug charges. Before the trial, counsel for the defense progressed to overturn the possession of drug evidence. They contended that the police were in violation of the fourth amendment of the constitution as the police had wrongly used the pretext of a traffic stop to investigate possible drug crimes
All evidence found within illegal standing and evidence that is illegally found by police without a search warrant, are inadmissible in court any illegal search done by officers
“On October 21, 2012 Sergeant William Butler and Officer Samantha Brown stopped a car in the 2000 block of East Street for failure to yield the right of way to a pedestrian. In the course of the car stop it was determined the driver was Jeffery Cox. According to the DMV registration information, Mr. Cox owned the car. Sitting in the car front passenger seat was Amanda Watson. When the officers checked on any outstanding warrants on the occupants of the vehicle, they received a positive response on Ms. Watson. Police arrested her based on an outstanding arrest warrant for misdemeanor shoplifting. When Ms. Watson was ordered out of the vehicle to be handcuffed Sgt. Butler noticed a plastic bag of a substance he suspected to be crack cocaine lying on the front seat where Watson had been sitting. Incident to the arrest on the warrant, Sgt. Brown searched Ms. Watson and found $650 in small denomination bills but no devices with which to ingest crack cocaine.”
The case revolves around Bob Marvin, president of the Motor Parts Corporation (MPC), and his executive vice president, AL Shepherd, who held a key senior management position in the company. After Bob, Al had the most important job since most of the line functions reported directly to him. His job required a considerable amount of traveling which he was not able to do lately because of his wife’s illness. Al 's wife, Ruth, was suffering from a malignant brain tumor due to which he was spending more and more time away from work to be with her.
It all started in 1979. Mazda, a relatively small player in the world automobile market in the automobile market at that time, wanted a string international partner in order to make the transformation from being a small niche player to becoming a major global automaker. At the same time Ford was also looking for a partner to help it design and produce smaller automobiles. The two firms agreed that they were logical partners.
The Braking system is an important aspect of the vehicle. Disc brake system comprises of disk placed between two pads. Hydraulic system helps these pads to come in contact with the disk to slow down the rotation of wheel and finally to stop the vehicle. The disk brakes are of two types a solid type and vented, vented disk have fins to allow air to pass in to it . The praper aims to study and analyzation of the parts disk and pad with changing parameters like material and area of contact of pad with disk. A vented disk brake is designed and results are studied. The CAD models are built in CATIA and a finite element model is built in HYPERMESH software. Analysis is done using RADIOSS software.
By the reading of it, Volkswagen management expressed what seemed like genuine shock when the EPA and California’s Air Resources Board revealed their joint findings regarding the automaker’s manipulation of US emissions testing for diesel cars outfitted with a particular 2.0-liter, four-cylinder engine.
Honda has established a program for its suppliers to strive for improvements in order to meet Honda’s requirements. The goals of the BP program are to improve the relationship between Honda and their suppliers, reduce manufacturing costs, and eliminate product defects. They accomplish these goals by focusing on 5 key areas: Best Position, Best Productivity, Best Product, Best Price, and Best Partners (Bounds and Arnold).