FLETC 4th Amendment Practice | Questions with 100% Correct Answers | Verified | Latest Update 2024

Thompson is suspected of running a counterfeiting operation out of his garage. The garage is attached to the dwelling. Without a warrant, three officers step onto his curtilage, shine a flashlight into the garage, and take a quick look. They observe a number of what appear to be $100 bills hanging from a clothesline. Was the observation into the garage lawful? - No, because the officers physically intruded on a constitutionally protect location without either a warrant or an exception to the 4th Amendment Agents develop reasonable suspicion that Wooster is operating a stolen credit card ring. Upon seeing Wooster driving in his car one afternoon, the agents follow him. When he arrives at a shopping mall, the agents approach him, identify themselves, and tell him to put his hands on his automobile. One of the agents frisks him and, in the upper left hand pocket, feels what is immediately apparent to him as a stack of credit cards bound by a rubber band. The agent removes the credit cards and, ultimately, determines that they are stolen. Wooster's motion to suppress the credit cards will be - - Granted, because the agents performed an illegal "frisk" of Wooster Johnson is arrested for drunk driving and failing to pay child support. He agrees to share information with the police to avoid prosecution. Having been personally involved in every aspect of an ongoing stolen paycheck operation, Johnson explained the intimate details to the police of what he saw and did with Fred, a co-criminal. Based on his statements alone, the officers seek a search warrant for the cocriminal's premises where Johnson stated he saw many of the stolen checks the day before. Can Johnson's statement alone establish Probable Cause to support a warrant application? - yes, because Johnson's statements amount to probable cause under a totality of the circumstances using the Illinois v. Gates test