100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
Previously searched by you
Summary final.docx CRJ310 People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et al. CRJ310 The University of Arizona Global Campus People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et al. Case: Thesis A judicial opinion can agree to by more than half of the members of$7.49
Add to cart
Summary final.docx CRJ310 People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et al. CRJ310 The University of Arizona Global Campus People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et al. Case: Thesis A judicial opinion can agree to by more than half of the members of
2 views 0 purchase
Course
UAGC
Institution
Ashford University
CRJ310 People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et al. CRJ310 The University of Arizona Global Campus People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et al. Case: 44416 Thesis A judicial opinion can agree to by more than half of the members of a court. As this essay is based by those opinions. The majorit...
et al crj310 the university of arizona global campus people v dripster
dummy amp stupido et al case 1903456 44416 thesis a judici
Written for
Ashford University
UAGC
All documents for this subject (718)
Seller
Follow
helperatsof1
Reviews received
Content preview
CRJ310
People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et al.
CRJ310
The University of Arizona Global Campus
People v. Dripster, Dummy & Stupido, et
al. Case: 1903456
8/8/2021
Thesis
A judicial opinion can agree to by more than half of the members of a court. As this
essay is based by those opinions. The majority opinion sets forth the decision of the court and
an explanation of the rationale behind the court's decision. The question is whether the fourth,
fifth and eighth amendment right under the defendant’s resolve per violation. After carefully
evaluating the evidence and judicial documentations and following through with issued
warrants. Hear, by place and power of the following information based on Judicial Supreme
Courts agreement as the opinion.
Body
Dripsters fourth Amendment right was under violation, when officers placed the
tracking device upon the vehicle owned by the girlfriend, it was the attempt to follow a
known criminal, under the Fourth Amendment the right to protect individuals from
government overreach starts by not allowing unreasonable search and seizure of current
citizen of the United States.
, However, law enforcement did not have permission from the car owner and
therefore violated freedom of one, Dripster. However, under certain procedures of the
RICO act, law enforcement officials can use this means of collecting data to hold a
criminal organization for investigation to bring all evidence under one roof. As for the
definition of RICO, “The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)
is a federal law designed to combat organized crime in the United States. It allows
prosecution and civil penalties for racketeering activity performed as part of an ongoing
criminal enterprise” (RICO, 2011). A RICO order approved by the Attorney General or
placed judge that is part of the investigation. to implement the case study. In this case no
evidence of written memorandum or warrant placing the criminal gang under the RICO
Act.
Evidence obtained from the residence
Evaluating whether all evidence from the house has discovery because evidence
considered fruit of the poisonous started from the tracking device. Citing extremely, that all
evidence in this case to removed is half tailed. Evidence collected after the tracking device
only includes the direction that the client’s headings. The collection of the whereabouts of
the defendants was the focus in this investigation. All evidence up to this point should not be
consider under the exclusionary rule since no evidence collection came from up to this point.
The Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 created that all cannabis and those
that have passion will receive penalties upon possession and forfeit of civil liberties.
Bloodhound tactics that were implemented by law enforcement to find and locate cannabis
and true to the search bloodhound found the smell of illegal cannabis at the residence that was
under investigation. Under the conditions that the bloodhound smell test used without a
warrant is with merit. Bloodhound devices that are used in cases are not used to remove
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller helperatsof1. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
