Tayler Patterson
Liberty University
Linda Venturo, professor
CJUS 200-D03 LUO
April 01, 2019
Application Essay 1
1. Can you seize the marijuana plants at the time? If yes, what is your legal
justification for doing so? If no, what legally prohibits you from doing so?
What biblical principles should you be considering?
I believe that the officer would be in his rights to seize the marijuana.
Even though the officer was responding to a noise complaint, he was there with
probable cause, and because the contraband was in the officer’s view of sight
without entering the home, or searching the homeowner. The officer is within his
rights to seize the contraband due to the “plain-view doctrine” which states that
government officials can seize evidence and contraband without a warrant as long
as they are within their legal rights by being able to see the evidence without
entering into the home or searching the person (Bohm, R., and Haley, K., pg.
106). Another example as to why the officer is able to legally seize the
contraband is because the evidence is some that could easily be destroyed.
Therefore, if the officer came back with a search warrant to do a drug bust, the
homeowner could have easily gotten rid of the evidence and contraband before
the warrant was even used to search the home.
2. Based on your observation of the marijuana plants, do you need a search
warrant to enter and search the house and the resident? If yes, what is the
basis for this legal requirement? If no, what is the justification for the
exception to the search warrant requirement? What biblical principles
should you be considering?
Yes, the officers would need a search warrant in order to search the home
and the resident because if not, it would be a violation of the fourth amendment,
which protects us from the government searching and seizing our private property
without having a legitimate reason to do so (Bohm, R., and Haley, K., pg. 102). In
order to obtain a search warrant, there must be a probable cause. However, the
seizure must be within the premise that the warrant is issued, and the warrant
must be utilized within ten days after it was issued. (Bohm, R., and Haley, K., pgs
103 & 104).
3. If you enter the residence and seize additional evidence inside and that
search and seizure is later deemed illegal, would the additional evidence be
admissible in court? Why or why not? What legal ruling(s) should you be
considering?
Because police officers must have a search warrant in order to enter a
residency and seize evidence or contraband, any evidence or contraband that is
seized without a warrant and deemed illegal, would not be valid evidence in court.
The evidence would not be admissible due to the “exclusionary rule”, which
states that “illegally seized evidence must be excluded from trials in federal
courts”(Bohm, R., and Haley, K., pg. 110). The reason that the evidence would be
considered illegal, making it inadmissible, is because by entering into a home and
seizing property without a warrant, the officer would be in violation of the fourth
amendment.
I believe that the biblical principles that should be taken into consideration
for both the first and the second question, are to obey the laws of the land. God
tells us that every person should obey the authorities because He instituted them,
therefore, when we directly break the laws of our society, we are not only
committing a crime, but we are breaking the laws that were appointed by God
(Romans 13:1-2, ESV).
Content word count: 455
References
Bohm, R. M., & Haley, K. N. (2018). Introduction to criminal justice. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill Education.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
