As a Supreme Court justice, how do you resolve the following intricate legal questions in this case revolving around the 4th amendment:
• Was the officer justified in calling for backup and then searching the house without obtaining a warrant?
• Should the police have been able to search the house while Freeman passed out based on the paraphernalia that was in the living room?
• Should the officers have searched Sapp and Alstott’s rooms after they were arrested?
• Was the backyard search justified?
• Should the police have been able to go and search the car that Freeman drove that night based on what they found at the house? What if they had not found anything at the house?
• Were the blood and urine tests, in this case, legitimate, or did they violate the suspect’s 4th Amendment rights?
• What, if any, of the evidence would you admit at trial? Should any of it be excluded, or is the evidence admissible? Justify your opinion.
Sample Solution
