Unit 9: Final Essay Exam Project
CJ305: Legal Foundations of Criminal Evidence
Prof: Anthony Gurrola
June 14, 2012
The five ways that you can authentication or identification process would be: A. Testimony of a witness that has first knowledge of the crime. B. A non-expert who is familiar with a person’s handwriting and did not gain knowledge of the handwriting for purpose of the litigation, such as a spouse or roommate. C. Allowing the jury or expert to compare the object to an example and decide the authenticity. D. The distinctive charaistics and surrounding circumstances such as sending a bill to an address and receiving payment from the bill. E. Voice…show more content… 4. Consent to search is an exception to the warrant; therefore the officer needs no justification to conduct a search pursuant to a valid consent. 5. Exigent circumstances is an exception to the warrant, it permits an officer to enter premises when there is a situation that requires immediate action. 6. Plain view doctrine is an exception to the warrant; it provides that an officer may seize an object without a warrant if the officer observes the object from the lawful vantage and if the nature of the object is immediately apparent as an article subject to seizure (Garland, 2011).
The four circumstances that are recognized as “exigent” are: 1. Hot pursuit is limited to a situation in which a suspect is followed from the point of the offense to the destination in a continuous transaction. 2. The exigency of imminent destruction of evidence may also justify the entry into and search of a dwelling, if the police have probable cause that believe that criminal evidence will be destroyed. 3. Suspect escape is an exigent; an officer may enter a home or other dwelling and search for a suspected felon who the officer has probable cause to believe is presently within the home and will escape if immediate action is not taken. 4. The risk of harm to the police or others justifying the search of a person or a home if the officer has probable cause to believe that a risk of harm exists(Garland, 2011).