FLETC Legal Exam Comprehensive
Study Guide + Exam Questions &
Solutions Graded A+
Professional Academic Assistance Services
Services Offered
• Proctored Exam Assistance
• Online Class Management (Full Course Support)
• Exam Preparation & Study Materials
• Assignments and Coursework Support
• Essay and Research Paper Writing
• Discussion Posts & Responses
• Editing and Proofreading
• Confidential Academic Consultation
Contact Information
Email:
WhatsApp link: https://wa.me/254704846336
Fast Response | Confidential | Reliable Academic
Support
Helping Students Achieve Academic Excellence
,1. 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?
a. No, because the officers physically intruded on a
constitutionally protect location without either a warrant or an
exception to the 4th Amendment.
b. No, because the use of a flashlight violated Thompson's
reasonable expectation of privacy.
c. Yes, because the garage does not have curtilage because it is
not a dwelling.
d. Yes, because the garage itself was not within the curtilage of
Thompson's dwelling. - Answer: a. No, because the officers
physically intruded on a constitutionally protect location
without either a warrant or an exception to the 4th
Amendment.
CORRECT: The root of the question says that the officers were
on Thompson's curtilage. The officers did not have a warrant to
,be there and there is no 4th Amendment exception.
Accordingly, the observation was unlawful and the information
they obtained cannot be lawfully used to obtain a warrant.
b. No, because the use of a flashlight violated Thompson's
reasonable expectation of privacy.
INCORRECT: Using a flashlight, by itself, does not violate a
person's REP.
c. Yes, because the garage does not have curtilage because it is
not a dwelling.
INCORRECT: Curtilage is not limited to dwellings and includes
areas surrounding a dwelling. (Review your student text.)
d. Yes, because the garage itself was not within the curtilage of
Thompson's dwelling.
INCORRECT: The garage was attached to the house so it was
very likely on the curtilage. More importantly, the officers were
unlawfully on the curtilage when they made their observations.
2. 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 -
a. Denied, because the agents had reasonable suspicion of
criminal activity.
b. Denied, because the agents had probable cause to remove
the cards from his pocket under the "plain touch" doctrine.
c. Granted, because the agents performed an illegal "frisk" of
Wooster.
d. Granted, because a "frisk" may result only in the discov -
Answer: a. Denied, because the agents had reasonable
suspicion of criminal activity.
INCORRECT: The officers only had reasonable suspicion criminal
activity was afoot which would allow them to make a Terry stop
and direct Wooster out of his car. The officers did not have
reasonable suspicion that Wooster was presently armed and
Study Guide + Exam Questions &
Solutions Graded A+
Professional Academic Assistance Services
Services Offered
• Proctored Exam Assistance
• Online Class Management (Full Course Support)
• Exam Preparation & Study Materials
• Assignments and Coursework Support
• Essay and Research Paper Writing
• Discussion Posts & Responses
• Editing and Proofreading
• Confidential Academic Consultation
Contact Information
Email:
WhatsApp link: https://wa.me/254704846336
Fast Response | Confidential | Reliable Academic
Support
Helping Students Achieve Academic Excellence
,1. 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?
a. No, because the officers physically intruded on a
constitutionally protect location without either a warrant or an
exception to the 4th Amendment.
b. No, because the use of a flashlight violated Thompson's
reasonable expectation of privacy.
c. Yes, because the garage does not have curtilage because it is
not a dwelling.
d. Yes, because the garage itself was not within the curtilage of
Thompson's dwelling. - Answer: a. No, because the officers
physically intruded on a constitutionally protect location
without either a warrant or an exception to the 4th
Amendment.
CORRECT: The root of the question says that the officers were
on Thompson's curtilage. The officers did not have a warrant to
,be there and there is no 4th Amendment exception.
Accordingly, the observation was unlawful and the information
they obtained cannot be lawfully used to obtain a warrant.
b. No, because the use of a flashlight violated Thompson's
reasonable expectation of privacy.
INCORRECT: Using a flashlight, by itself, does not violate a
person's REP.
c. Yes, because the garage does not have curtilage because it is
not a dwelling.
INCORRECT: Curtilage is not limited to dwellings and includes
areas surrounding a dwelling. (Review your student text.)
d. Yes, because the garage itself was not within the curtilage of
Thompson's dwelling.
INCORRECT: The garage was attached to the house so it was
very likely on the curtilage. More importantly, the officers were
unlawfully on the curtilage when they made their observations.
2. 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 -
a. Denied, because the agents had reasonable suspicion of
criminal activity.
b. Denied, because the agents had probable cause to remove
the cards from his pocket under the "plain touch" doctrine.
c. Granted, because the agents performed an illegal "frisk" of
Wooster.
d. Granted, because a "frisk" may result only in the discov -
Answer: a. Denied, because the agents had reasonable
suspicion of criminal activity.
INCORRECT: The officers only had reasonable suspicion criminal
activity was afoot which would allow them to make a Terry stop
and direct Wooster out of his car. The officers did not have
reasonable suspicion that Wooster was presently armed and
