1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Alenkasestr [34]
3 years ago
11

The plain view doctrine refers to the power of law enforcement to seize any contraband materials that are in plain view, even if

the officers don't have a specific warrent for them. Consider the case when during a warrant house search, the law enforcement officers are looking for evidence of a digital crime involving credit card fraud. While in the house, they find no evidence of credit card fraud or any other crime that involves credit cards. While looking around they found various pirated movies and DVD duplication equipment. Can they seize this equipment and arrest the owners
Law
1 answer:
Dmitriy789 [7]3 years ago
7 0

Answer: Yes, they can seize the equipment and arrest the owners.

Explanation:

Under the plain view doctrine, the law enforcement officers may seize illegal contraband even without a warrant when it's observed in an officer's plain view. The officer must legally be allowed to be there, and the officer must have probable cause to believe that the seized objects relate to criminal activity.

In this scenario, while looking around the house,if they found various pirated movies and DVD duplication equipment, they can seize the equipment and arrest the owners. Piracy is theft. The officers found t pirated movies and DVD duplication equipment. Downloading a film or copying a movie without paying is a breach of copyright.

You might be interested in
if a person charged with treason denies his guilt, how many persons must testify against him before he can be convicted?
Rufina [12.5K]
I think it’s only 2 but I’m not completely sure
3 0
2 years ago
HELP PLEASE!!!
Reil [10]

Answer:

A

Explanation:

in your own opinion

good luck

4 0
2 years ago
1. Is Defensible Space Theory a logical explanation for controlling crime? Why or why not?
Kaylis [27]

Answer:

See explaination

Explanation:

1. The Defensible Space Theory can really be seen as a logical explanation for controlling crime from the perspectives of a defender as well as an attacker. This theory makes use of the science of psychology with the science of meaningful space. When the defender, that is, the home owners will be responsible for their home space, the sense of responsibility will be higher on the same. The home owners will be accountable for their defense. This encourages home owners to design their home space in such a way that they will be able to control their environment based on their present capabilities like family structure, income level, and socioeconomic status. The attacker, that is, the potential criminal will feel insecure and uncomfortable on a highly defended land. So, the probability of the criminal attacking the home space or neighborhood may be lessened. This argument is supported by the study which involved private homes in two high-crime areas in St. Louis. These areas recorded lower crimes than public areas using the Defensible Space Theory.

2. According to the Routine Activity Theory, the condition for crime is the presence of a suitable target(s) and the absence of a guardian(s). It is important to note that something or the other will always be present to motivate potential offenders to commit crime. So, there will always be motivated offenders. If motivated offenders are present, so suitable targets will be present in the society on the other side for crime to take place. So, suitable targets cannot be left unguarded which will increase the probability of crime, considering the target is in an isolated position. Even a weak guardian is sometimes equivalent to no guardian or protector. So, I think, presence of guardian(s), more specifically, more capable guardian(s) plays the greatest role at reducing

8 0
3 years ago
1. A statute is
aleksklad [387]

Answer:

I believe the answer to 1. is B, and Grare decisis means substantially the same. Basically based on a court's previous decision in a case, that same decision can be carried out and used in any future cases.

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How would a catastrophic terrorist attack affect the American homeland security culture
kaheart [24]
The homeland security culture would strengthen, becoming more advanced then we have ever seen it
3 0
1 year ago
Other questions:
  • Who is Prime Minister of world ​
    8·1 answer
  • Why did my parints devorce? ​
    14·2 answers
  • I have not been selected for a diversity visa twice and now I’m planning to apply for a student visa in Australia. Can I apply?
    7·2 answers
  • planning to kill someone, and taking the first step toward it, is an example of which of the following? inchoate crime, felony,
    11·1 answer
  • 2. What are the bits of pigment found in the cortex of a hair is called and why are they dark?​
    14·1 answer
  • HELPPPP!!!!! :(((
    6·2 answers
  • Which form of damages involves a court ordering a party to a contract to perform his/her obligations under the contract
    12·1 answer
  • As an 18 year old in Alabama I know that the age majority is 19, and I can't drop out of high school without parent permission b
    15·1 answer
  • 30 POINTS TIMER PLS HELP PLATO CIVIS
    12·1 answer
  • You have been asked to assist a defense attorney to plan how to best present the defendant's case. You insist that all the defen
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!