The following case study presents issues related to various levels of police encounters with a suspect and potential criminal evidence and the legal justification required for those encounters.
Officer Taylor is on routine nighttime patrol when she notices a vehicle pass her driven by an African American female. The vehicle appears to have a broken taillight that appears to be covered with colored tape. She directs the driver to pull the car to the side of the road. The car is an older model gold Pontiac and as Officer Taylor walks to the driver-side of the vehicle, she remembers that a car fitting this general description was the suspected car in a recent road side killing of a fellow police officer.
The driver has long braids, tattoos, and a nose ring. As Officer Taylor looks at the driver, she thinks to herself, “Another one of those people we need to get off the streets.”
Wanting to make sure that she is safe, Officer Taylor asks the driver to step out of her vehicle for a brief pat-down for weapons. She pats her down and finding no weapons, Officer Taylor asks the driver to have a seat back inside her vehicle. Officer Taylor then asks the driver for her driver’s license and registration. Instead of providing her driver’s license and registration, the driver speeds away resulting in a high speed chase.
The chase ends when the fleeing car hits a telephone pole and crashes.
Concerned that the car may ignite in flames from a leaking gas tank, Officer Taylor removes the unconscious woman to a safe distance from the vehicle. Officer Taylor returns to the vehicle to locate the driver’s purse for identification. As she enters the vehicle, Officer Taylor notices the glove compartment has popped open and that underneath some documents is a gun which she retrieves. Officer Taylor also retrieves the driver’s purse from the floor on the passenger side of the vehicle. Officer Taylor opens the purse to get the woman’s identification and finds what appears to be a baggie of marijuana. It is later determined that this vehicle was not the car involved in the shooting death of the fellow officer. It is also later determined that the taillight was not broken.
Please answer the following questions explaining your answer in detail by analyzing the facts presented and other factors you consider relevant; defining and explaining key legal terms; and citing legal authority (your text and other legal authority) to support your conclusions in a 2–3 page paper (excluding the title page and reference page):
Note: This Assignment will require outside research. Use at least two credible sources beyond the text material, and discuss how you evaluated the credibility of the resources used. You may consult the Kaplan Online Library, the internet, the textbook, course material, and any other outside resources in supporting your task. Use proper citations in APA style.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more