Reference no: EM133415722

Assignment:

Explain the Requirement of Particularity in regard to Search Warrants.

Explain the Fruit of a Poisonous Tree doctrine.

1. In civil cases, each party is entitled to all the information in the possession of the other side (unless that information is privileged). Why are discovery rules in criminal cases different?

2. To what extent do prosecutorial policies that restrict the sharing of information with defense attorneys other than what is legally required represent a contradiction in the crime control model?

3. When the Court announced its decision in Miranda v. Arizona in 1966, the decision sparked massive controversy and was a major issue in the 1968 presidential campaign. Yet, over time it has become much more accepted than the Court's decision in Mapp v. Ohio regarding search and seizure. What factors might explain this apparent shift in assessments?

4. A number of conservatives call for eliminating or restricting the exclusionary rule in street crimes. Yet some conservatives also call for a stricter rule in white-collar crimes, suggesting that the financial records of a person or a business should be given special protections under the Fourth Amendment. Are these arguments consistent or simply a case of whose ox is being gored? How would these arguments play out if a substantial citizen in the community (whose financial records are being requested) were under investigation for major drug dealings?

5. To what extent is the continuing controversy over search-and-seizure law really a debate over the war on drugs?