Portfolio Project Fact Pattern - Officer Dan, a police officer on the force

Portfolio Project Fact Pattern

State v. Lauren

Officer Dan, a police officer on the force for five years, pulled over Ben, who had been driving 70 miles per hour in a 65-mile-per-hour zone. Ben had been driving a rental car and, when stopped, he gave valid legal consent to a search of the car. Upon the search, Officer Dan discovered a large quantity of heroin in the console between the two front seats. He immediately arrested Ben. Officer Dan promptly read Ben his Miranda rights, which Ben waived. Ben stated he was just driving the car for his friend Lauren and he was driving to meet her, where she was going to pick up the heroin. Ben said it was Lauren’s drugs, not his. He offered to cooperate with Officer Dan because he was hoping he would not be charged with a crime. Officer Dan had Ben meet Lauren as the two had planned. Once she got in the car, however, Officer Dan headed toward her with intent to arrest her.

Lauren noticed Officer Dan, and she jumped out of the car, running as fast as she could. She ran for two blocks, even knocking over a pedestrian, Pete. She climbed a fence and escaped.

 

Officer Dan found Lauren at her residence. He had a valid warrant for her arrest. Lauren was presented in a line-up and Pete the pedestrian picked Lauren out of the line-up.

 

Both Ben and Lauren were charged with possession and distribution of heroin.

 

Lauren’s trial started before Ben’s trial. At her trial, several things happened:

 

· Officer Dan was called by the prosecution. Officer Dan testified to the statements Ben said at the time of his arrest.

 

· The prosecutor called Marilyn, an experienced detective with 20 years working in the Narcotics Bureau. She testified that it was standard practice for high-level drug dealers to use other people to transport the drugs.

 

· The prosecutor called Josh, Lauren’s estranged husband. The prosecutor demanded to know whether Lauren used drugs or sold drugs.

 

· The prosecutor sought to introduce bank records showing high levels of cash deposits going into Lauren’s bank account as evidence of drug-sale money.

 

· The prosecutor called the pedestrian, Pete, to testify about the incident when he’d been knocked to the ground during the chase with Officer Dan. Pete said as Lauren was approaching, he heard her say “I can’t get busted for this! This was foolproof for so long!” Pete also testified that in his opinion it appeared she was running away from the police.

 

Lauren testified in her own defense. In her testimony:

 

· She stated that she didn’t know about the heroin in the car and that she was not a drug dealer. She stated her purpose for meeting with Ben that day was because he was an old friend in town and she wanted to visit with him.

 

· She also testified that when she got in the car with Ben, she noticed a receipt for the rental car. It had indicated that it was rented by Ben one month prior to the arrests. It was offered into evidence, which the court admitted.

 

· The defense also sought to introduce fingerprint evidence proving Lauren’s fingerprints were not on the bag of heroin.

 

· The defense further sought to call the youth leader at the local YMCA to testify that Lauren regularly volunteered for activities with underprivileged kids and that she was a valued role model for the children there.

 

· While cross-examined, the prosecutor questioned Lauren whether she lied on her tax returns. The prosecutor actually had no proof that she did lie but figured most drug dealers don’t report their income. Lauren stated she never lied on her taxes.

 

2

 

Applying the Laws of Evidence to a Fact Pattern

For this Project, you will apply what you have learned about laws of evidence to the Fact Pattern titled State v. Lauren, which will serve as a fictional case study for this assignment.

Submit a critical essay that meets the following requirements.

Directions

1. Download and read the Fact Pattern for State v. Lauren.

2. For purposes of this exercise, base your answers on the  Federal Rules of Evidence (Links to an external site.)  (FRE).

3. Discuss the evidentiary issues that arise in State v. Lauren. In discussing these legal issues, be clear about the evidentiary rule of law, citing the applicable rule. Apply facts from the case to the law and come to a conclusion on the evidentiary issue.

4.  In addition to legal rules, you should discuss at least four relevant cases studied in this course or researched for this project insofar as they are relevant to the legal issue raised in this case.

a. Distinguish and/or use analogy to compare the facts from the researched cases to the facts in this case.

b. Apply best practices for the organization of your essay: consider addressing each issue with a clear heading or subheading as necessary.

5. While writing your project, be sure to remain objective—that is, don't sway to one side or the other without clear justification. Consider all possible arguments and issues that could be raised with each piece of evidence. Precision is key in addressing legal rules of evidence.

6. Be sure to address the applicable burdens raised in this case.

Paper Instructions:

· Your paper should be 8-10 pages in length (not including the required title and references pages).

· Include discussion and citation of at least four credible sources other than (or in addition to) the course textbook.