Right to counsel — MCQs

Using only the supplied client file and legal resources, prepare an advisory letter to client Elena Morris explaining whether the pending prosecution is barred by double jeopardy, how the earlier mistrial affects that analysis, and what factual development should be documented before counsel decides whether to file a motion to dismiss.

Using only the supplied client file and legal resources, prepare a persuasive memorandum supporting Jordan Bell's motion to suppress the firearm. Address the initial seizure, the frisk, the search of the backpack, the prosecution's strongest counterarguments, and the appropriate remedy.

Sam Patel has been charged in federal court with distributing controlled substances. Officers arrested Sam while executing a premises warrant, searched Sam's smartphone without a digital-search warrant, used the messages to question Sam without warnings, and relied on those materials to obtain a later storage-unit warrant. Using only the supplied client file and legal resources, prepare a persuasive motion argument seeking suppression. Address Sam's privacy interest, the limits of search incident to arrest, custodial interrogation, derivative evidence, and the government's strongest counterarguments.

Officers had probable cause to arrest a suspected drug distributor based on controlled purchases witnessed during a month-long investigation. They arrested the suspect on a public sidewalk and found a smartphone in his jacket pocket during a search incident to the arrest. The officers secured the phone, which could not be remotely accessed while held in a shielded evidence bag. Without obtaining a warrant, an officer opened the phone using the suspect's face and reviewed stored messages. The messages identified additional customers and suppliers. The suspect has moved to suppress the messages in the pending prosecution. Is the court likely to grant the motion?

A driver knowingly raced another vehicle through a residential neighborhood at twice the posted speed. The driver struck a pedestrian who was crossing outside a marked crosswalk. At the hospital, a physician negligently failed to diagnose internal bleeding that ordinarily would have been treatable. The pedestrian died the next morning. A medical expert concluded that the collision caused the internal bleeding and that prompt treatment probably would have prevented death. The jurisdiction follows generally accepted principles of criminal causation and defines involuntary manslaughter as causing death through reckless conduct. The prosecutor is considering an involuntary-manslaughter charge against the driver. Which of the following is the strongest conclusion regarding causation?

Detectives investigating a warehouse fire telephoned a suspect and asked whether he would come to the police station to answer questions. The suspect drove himself to the station. At the beginning of the interview, the detectives told him that he was not under arrest, could decline to answer questions, and could leave at any time. The interview-room door remained unlocked, and the suspect retained his phone and car keys. Twenty minutes into the interview, the suspect said, "I think I want a lawyer before answering anything else." The detectives did not threaten or restrain him and reminded him that he could leave, but they continued asking questions. He then admitted setting the fire. No arrest, indictment, initial appearance, or other formal proceeding had occurred before the interview. Which of the following best states whether the federal Constitution required the detectives to stop questioning?

Police arrested a woman for shoplifting, handcuffed her, and placed her in the back of a patrol car. Without giving Miranda warnings, an officer asked, "Where did you put the watches?" The woman answered, "They are under the passenger seat of my car." Police retrieved the watches from that location. The prosecutor plans to introduce both the statement and the watches in the prosecution's case-in-chief. The woman moves to suppress both. The court finds that the statement was voluntary, but that the officer subjected the woman to custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings. Which of the following best states the likely ruling?