Write a two-page paper analyzing the fact pattern presented below. Please use federal law. Your analysis
should include application of the topics covered during the past seven weeks. For example, search and
seizure, search warrants, execution of warrants, exceptions to the warrant requirement, exclusionary rule,
Miranda rights, and the right against self-incrimination. Do not restate the facts in your paper, but rather identify
the issues, analyze, and provide your legal reasoning.
Ensure your citations are in APA or Bluebook format.
Chris is a police officer with the local Centerville Police Department. She is in plain clothes and knocked on the
front door of Steve’s house and asked if she could enter to enforce a valid warrant. The warrant was a search
warrant issued by Judge Wells from the Centerville District Court. Judge Wells is a retired state police trooper
from the state police barracks in Centerville. The warrant indicated that “the first floor of Steve’s house will be
searched for a gun used in connection with a robbery and jewelry, which was stolen.” While searching the first
floor of Steve’s house, Officer Chris smelled what she thought was gun powder emanating from the second
floor. Officer Chris immediately walked upstairs and found a gun at the tops of the stairs. She went to
confiscate the gun and while doing so noticed a note attached to the gun with an address on it. The address
was a known location for stolen jewelry to be pawned. During the search, Steve told Officer Chris that, “I do not
know what you are here for, because I did not rob Grubb’s jewelry store.” Officer Chris asked Steve to go to the
police station and Steve agreed. As they walked into the police station, Judge Wells yelled, “is that the person
who robbed Grubb’s jewelry store?” Steve replied, “I told Officer Chris already, I did not rob Grubb’s jewelry
store.”
Sample Solution
