978-0077733711 Chapter 5 Solution Manual

Unlock access to all the studying documents.

View Full Document

Chapter 05 – Criminal Law and Procedure

V. ANSWERS TO PROBLEM CASES:

1. No. The Supreme Court granted the government’s petition for a writ of certiorari and held

that Ressam’s conviction should stand. Therefore, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s

2. The U.S Supreme Court ruled that the traffic stop did not violate the Fourth Amendment

because the officer had a reasonable suspicion that the driver was intoxicated. The

anonymous phone tip was sufficiently reliable under the circumstances because she claimed

3. No. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit noted that the Fifth Amendment

privilege against self-incrimination does not extend to legal entities such as corporations.

Moreover, the court observed, a private individual cannot claim such a privilege against the

production of documents belonging to a corporation on the ground that they would tend to

4. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that no Fourth Amendment violation occurred when

the U.S. Customs Service agent removed shredded documents from a garbage bag found

inside the dumpster located on Bet-Air’s property. According to the court, Bet-Air’s

subjective expectation of privacy in its garbage was not objectively reasonable–and hence

5. The Supreme Court held that the term “proceeds,” as used in the federal money-laundering

statute, refers to profits of an unlawful activity rather to receipts taken in by the defendant or

5-1

manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

Chapter 05 – Criminal Law and Procedure

defendants as a result of their unlawful activity. The Court concluded that “proceeds” means

“profits” because, if “proceeds” meant “receipts,” many criminal cases not conventionally

seen as involving money-laundering would have money-laundering counts added to them,

6. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the search of the automobile violated the

Fourth Amendment. Warrantless searches of the arrestee incident to an arrest have long been

held permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The same has been true of certain warrantless

searches of an arrestee’s automobile. However, the Court regarded the automobile search at

issue here as different from the leading case in which the Court recognized that an arrestee’s

7. The Supreme Court held that in order to state a valid civil RICO claim, the plaintiff must be

able to establish a direct causation link between the RICO violation and the harm experienced

by the plaintiff. The Court concluded that there was an absence of a direct causation link

8. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, a limited segment of the tape’s audio portion–the

segment dealing with the question about the date of Muniz’s sixth birthday–should have been

suppressed under the Fifth Amendment and Miranda. That question called for a testimonial

5-2

manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

Chapter 05 – Criminal Law and Procedure

considered nontestimonial (despite being incriminating), just as the sound of one’s voice and

9. No. The court observed that the meaning of §§ 1037(a)(3) and (a)(4) could be discerned

more clearly by reviewing a later subsection, § 1037(d)(2). In that subsection, Congress

stated:

For purposes of [§§ 1037(a)(3) and (a)(4),] header information or registration information

is materially falsified if it is altered or concealed in a manner that would impair the ability

The court noted that even if an email address does not necessarily identify the sender, “it does

tell a recipient where to send replies to the sender, much in the same way a return address on

an envelope [operates].” Therefore, the court concluded that “[a] material falsification of

10. No. The U.S. Supreme Court held that law enforcement officers violated the Fourth

Amendment when they used a thermal imaging device to detect heat emanating from Kyllo’s

home, in order to determine whether the heat emanations were consistent with the amount

normally given off by high-intensity lamps that are used for indoor growth of marijuana. The

police used the information they gained from use of the thermal imaging device as part or all

of the basis for a request for a search warrant regarding Kyllo’s home. The Court’s holding

5-3

manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

Chapter 05 – Criminal Law and Procedure

11. No, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded. Park occupied a position of responsibility and

authority with regard to the act or transaction constituting the offense, and he had the power

12. Affirming the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court, the U.S. Supreme Court disapproved

of what had become a fairly commonly employed police tactic: question a suspect in custody

without first giving the Miranda warnings; elicit a confession (which would be

unconstitutional and hence inadmissible); then give the Miranda warnings and resume

questioning by taking the suspect over the previously discussed territory; and elicit a new

confession. The Court held that such a tactic undermined the constitutionally required

13. The U.S. Supreme Court held that the warrantless entry of the apartment did not violate HK’s

14. No, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled. Because WF was no longer on the premises when the

5-4

manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.