*PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS PROFESSOR GRADES EXTREMELY HARD. PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS DETAILED, CONCISE AND WELL EXPLAINED :)*

Police received a tip that a man has been selling drugs out of his house and that there are several teenagers who work for him as peddlers. Two officers stopped him outside his house and asked if he would accompany them to the station to answer some questions. He agreed to come along.

On the way to the station, the officers pointed to children walking around and mentioned that penalty is heavy for those who sell drugs to children, or involve them in selling drugs. The suspect said, “Hey, I may have dealt some drugs, but I have never sold to kids or dealt with kids.“

When they arrived at the station, the officers arrested him and read him his rights, based on the tip they had received initially, and his admission to selling drugs. Then he was taken to a room and confronted with being the center of a drug ring that uses teenagers to distribute drugs. He asked, “Maybe I should call my lawyer?“ The officers replied, “Telling us the truth will do much more for you than seeing a lawyer.“ The man admitted to his involvement and called his lawyer afterward.

Based on the case study for this week, submit a 6- to 8-page case analysis using Microsoft Word that answers the following questions:

• Assume that you are the judge on this case. What motions to dismiss would you expect to hear from the defense in the case? How would the prosecution counter these motions?
• What are the key issues arising from the defendant’s admission made while in the police car? Is the case within the ambit of Miranda, or outside it? Why do you think so?
• Should the defendant’s admission in the police car be admissible? Why or why not? Discuss with reference to United States v. Patane (2004).
• What are the key issues surrounding the defendant’s admission while at the police station? Explain in detail with reference to the Miranda warnings and the fact that during interrogation the defendant had mentioned, not demanded, a lawyer.
• Should the admission made at the station be admissible? Why or why not?
• What would have been the effect on this case if the suspect had not asked for his lawyer? Discuss with reference to Escobedo v. Illinois.
• What evidence could be added to the scenario to strengthen a defense attorney’s motion to dismiss the evidence? What evidence could be added to weaken it?

Answer preview

The police officers received information that a man has been peddling drugs out of his apartment, and he involves teenagers to peddle his drugs.  The two police officers stopped at his apartment and told him to accompany them for interrogation in the station.  The man agreed to accompany the police officers to the station.  On their way to the station, the officers highlighted that the penalty of those people who involve the children substance abused is tougher. The man interjected by saying that even though he has ever dealt with drugs, he had never involved the children.  Upon arriving at the station, he was arrested and made aware of his rights as per information they had received about his involvement in peddling drugs.  The man was taken to a room where he was told that he was in the center of the drug ring that was involving the minors.  On his attempt to call a lawyer, the police interjected by telling him that would be better for him to admit his charges rather than calling the lawyer.  He ended up admitting his involvement and called his lawyer later.

Motions to dismiss the case and the motions to counter the defense that the Judge expects to hear from the defense in the case.

Before the judge makes a final decision, he or she has to listen to both the prosecution and the defendant’s side carefully and capture every fact.  Both prosecution and the defendant do present facts in the means of winning the courts favor…

 

(1900 words)