Reference no: EM131025998

1. Jones and Wilson were on trial, separately, for larceny of a $1,000 bearer bond (a bearer bond is a bond that is payable to the holder of the bond, not a named person) issued by Brown, Inc.the commonwealth's evidence showed that the owner of the bond put it in an envelope bearing his name and address and dropped it accidentally in the street; that Jones found the envelope with the bond in it; that Jones could neither read nor write; that Jones presented the envelope and bond to Wilson, an educated man, and asked Wilson what he should do with it; that Wilson told Jones that the finder of lost property becomes the owner of it; that Wilson told Jones that the bond was worth $100 but that the money could be collected only at the issuer's home office; that Jones then handed the bond to Wilson who redeemed it at the corporation's home office and received $1,000; that Wilson gave Jones $100 of the proceeds.Is Wilson guilty of committing a crime?If so what was the crime? Is Jones guilty of committing a crime? If so, what was the crime? Please explain.

2. Waronek owned and operated a trucking rig, transporting goods for L.T.L. Perishables, Inc., of St. Paul Minnesota.He accepted an offer to haul a trailer load of beef from Illini Beef Packer, Inc., in Joslin, Illinois to Midtown Packing Company in New York City.After his truck was loaded with ninety-five forequarters and ninety-five hindquarters of beef in Joslin, Waronek drove north to his home in Watertown, Wisconsin, rather than east to New York.While in Watertown, he asked employees of the Royal Meat Company to butcher and prepare four hindquarters of beef-two for himself and two for his friends.He also offered to sell ten hindquarters to one employee of the company at an alarmingly reduced rate.The suspicious employee contacted the authorities, who told him to proceed with the deal.When Waronek arrived in New York with his load short nineteen hindquarters, Waronek telephoned L.T.L. Perishables in St. Paul.He notified them "that he was short nineteen hindquarters, that he knew where the beef went, and that he would make good on it out of future settlements."L.T.L. told him to contact the New York police but he failed to do so.Shortly thereafter, he was arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and indicted for the embezzlement of goods moving in interstate commerce.Explain whether Waronek was guilty of the crime of embezzlement.

3. The police obtained a search warrant based on an affidavit that contained the following allegations: (a) Donald was seen crossing a state line on four occasions during a five-day period and going to a particular apartment; (b) telephone record disclosed that the apartment had two telephones; (c) Donald had a reputation as a bookmaker and as an associate of gamblers; and (d) the Federal Bureau of Investigation was informed by a "confidential reliable informant" that Donald was conducting gambling operations from the apartment.The affidavit did not indicate how the informant knew of this information nor did it contain any information about the reliability of the informant.When a search was made based on the warrant, evidence was obtained that resulted in Donald's conviction of violating certain gambling laws.Donald challenged the constitutionality of the search warrant.Were Donald's constitutional rights violated?Please explain.