WUCL—Final Exam CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Professor Morris-Collin Friday, Dec. 10, 2010 1:30 pm – 4:30 pm Student Exam #_______ ________________________________________________________________________

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

Read only this sheet before the examination begins. Do not turn the page until the exam begins.

It is the responsibility of law students to be familiar with the Student Grievance Procedure. The following acts are violations over which the Grievance Committee has jurisdiction:

A. Acquiring or divulging unauthorized information concerning the content of an examination or other graded course material.

B. Violating the time limits provided for an examination, either by beginning before the stipulated time or by answering after the time set for completion.

C. Falsely representing another’s words or ideas as one’s own, in any academic work.

D. Collaborating upon a course-required project without the authorization of the instructor.

Put exam numbers on the exam envelope before the exam begins. Put exam numbers on the blue books as you use them. Page numbers are not necessary in the blue books. An announcement will be given in each test center to start and stop the exam, including a 5-minute warning before the end of allocated exam time. All writing and marking on exams must cease when the announcement is made that the allocated time for the exam has expired. No exceptions will be allowed. This includes writing page and/or exam numbers on your completed exam. All used scratch paper is to be returned inside the exam envelope. All unused blue books and scratch paper are to be returned to the collection box in the lobby. All exam questions must be returned at the end of the exam unless instructions clearly state that you may keep the questions. If you have software problems that you cannot remedy by re-booting and re-launching the Exam4 software, you must hand-write the remainder of your exam.

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

This is a three-hour examination. It consists of two parts. Part One is one hour long and consists of three

short-answer questions. Part Two is two hours long and consists of two essay questions.

1. No materials or persons may be consulted during this examination.

2. Before you begin to write, read each question carefully. Be sure that you understand what the question is asking you to do, and answer all the questions that are asked. Provide a well-developed analysis of the facts; this means writing an accurate statement of the applicable legal principles and demonstrating how the facts of the particular question apply to the content of the legal principles that you discuss.

3. WARNING: STRICT LIMITS ON WRITING WILL BE APPLIED.

ABIDE BY THE WRITING LIMITATIONS SPECIFIED IN EACH QUESTION. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL MAY BE DISREGARDED.

4. Do not assume there are any additional relevant facts beyond those given. If you believe that it is essential to know additional information to answer fully any question, indicate what information you think is necessary and what difference it would make in your analysis.

All facts in the essay questions are fact-based fictional accounts and no resemblance to anyone living or dead is intended.

* * *

WUCL—Final Exam CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Professor Morris-Collin Friday, Dec. 10, 2010 1:30 pm – 4:30 pm Student Exam #_______

2

PART ONE: THREE SHORT-ANSWER QUESTIONS

Recommended Time: One Hour Word Limit: 350 words per question

The following are quotations from United States Supreme Court cases that we have read for this course. Please discuss each quotation, including its source (if you know it) and context, as well as its significance for the issues in this course. You will be allowed 350 words to discuss each quotation.

Quotation #1

“[t]he criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered.” (Maximum words allowed 350)

Quotation #2

“[t]he mere fact that law enforcement may be made more efficient can never by itself justify disregard of the Fourth Amendment. The investigation of crime would always be simplified if warrants were unnecessary. But the Fourth Amendment reflects the view of those who wrote the Bill of Rights that the privacy of a person’s home and property may not be totally sacrificed in the name of maximum simplicity in enforcement of the criminal law.” (Maximum words allowed 350)

Quotation #3

“Regardless of how effective the rule may be where obtaining convictions is an important objective of the police, it is powerless to deter invasions of constitutionally guaranteed rights where the police either have no interest in prosecution or are willing to forego successful prosecution in the interest of serving some other goal.” (Maximum words allowed 350)

WUCL—Final Exam CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Professor Morris-Collin Friday, Dec. 10, 2010 1:30 pm – 4:30 pm Student Exam #_______

3

PART TWO: ESSAY QUESTIONS

Essay Question One

Recommended Time: One Hour Word Limit: 2000 words or one handwritten blue book, both sides

The State of Grace legislature has just passed two statutes. The first is a search and seizure statute that

states, “State officials of the State of Grace are permitted to conduct all searches, and make all seizures that are reasonable without a warrant.” The State has also passed another misdemeanor statute making it a criminal offense to work in the state without proof of lawful federal immigration status or citizenship. Sheriff Joe is a sheriff in a county of the State of Grace. He has publicly declared his county a “no-go zone” for undocumented workers. He has announced his intention to make all places harboring undocumented workers targets of investigation. The County Attorney of his county has informed Sheriff Joe that the search and seizure statute may be ruled unconstitutional. He expressed no opinion about the misdemeanor statute, and for the purposes of this exam, you should assume the misdemeanor statute is constitutional. Trinity Cathedral is located in Sheriff Joe’s county. It has declared itself a sanctuary for refugees fleeing persecution in their countries of origin. Sheriff Joe directed his officers to enter Trinity Cathedral and search for evidence of undocumented workers taking shelter there. They executed his orders without a search warrant on a Sunday morning in December designated “Sanctuary Sunday” on the Church’s outdoor bulletin board. The Church was full of worshippers as well as refugees sheltering there. All persons on the premises were frisked and asked about their immigration and citizenship status. The frisks and questions lasted an average of 3 minutes. These practices included children and elderly people. All Hispanic surnamed people without proof of citizenship were taken to the County jail and booked for suspicion of violating the state’s misdemeanor statute making violation of federal immigration law a state misdemeanor. Assistant prosecutors have refused to file any charges in most of these cases. For purposes of this exam, assume that the misdemeanor statute defining a crime is constitutional and do not discuss its constitutional status. However, Dave Acusado was arrested as the result of the search of Trinity Cathedral. The frisk of his person turned up a syringe and small amount of heroin. He was part of Narcotics Anonymous group that met regularly in the Church basement. Dave was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled substance.

Dave’s Defense attorney wants to make a motion to suppress the syringe and heroin in this case. What are his best arguments, and how will the State of Grace respond to them?

WUCL—Final Exam CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Professor Morris-Collin Friday, Dec. 10, 2010 1:30 pm – 4:30 pm Student Exam #_______

4

Essay Question Two

Recommended Time: One Hour Word Limit: 2000 words or one handwritten blue book, both sides

Darcy Defendant was 17 when she was arrested for murder. It was a cold October morning, and she was

arrested outside her home wearing a bikini top, shorts, and no shoes. She was advised of her Miranda rights immediately upon arrest, and she promptly stated that she wanted to speak to a lawyer. She was then transported without further questioning to the county jail. At the jail, she was booked and placed in a cell with several other women.

One hour later, before she had a chance to meet with a lawyer, the same police officer who had arrested her came to her cell, dropped off charging documents, as required by state law, and told her to read them carefully. These charging documents state the offense of her arrest. They are not official charges; they are not the equivalent of either an information (signed by a prosecutor) or an indictment. The charging documents contained an error because they stated that she would be eligible for the death penalty, however, she was ineligible for the death penalty under state law that exempts persons under 18 years of age.

She read the documents, and reacted in shock beginning to shake uncontrollably and to cry. One of the other

cellmates noted her reaction, and approached her, asking what the matter was. Shaking and chattering, Darcy told her that she was not going to die for killing “that perv.” The helpful cellmate told her to control herself, not to speak to the cops until she saw her lawyer, and to make the guards give her some clothes so she could warm up and regain her composure.

So Darcy yelled for the guards. The same officer that arrested her and who also brought her the charging documents reappeared and said, “I bet you want to talk now.” A jail guard overheard the comment and said, “No, she doesn’t want to talk to us. She has already asked for a lawyer. We cannot talk to her now.” Then, they both left the area.

After they left, Darcy started yelling again, and the same police officer appeared again, this time he had some clothes for her. She asked him, “Could I talk to you?” He said that she could. She was then taken from the holding cell to an interrogation room, where she was given her Miranda rights again. Afterwards she made a full confession. Darcy’s defense attorney has received notice of the intention of the State to use two of her statements in evidence against Darcy at trial for murder; the first is the confession she made to her cellmate in the holding cell, and the second is the confession she made during interrogation by the police. Discuss the admissibility of both confessions.

END OF EXAM