According to the Court of Appeals decision in United States v.Rodney:
A) consent to search a person includes consent to frisk the groin area.
B) consent to search a person does not include consent to frisk the groin area.
C) consent to search a person includes consent to frisk the groin area only if police specifically ask for such.
D) consent to search a person includes consent to frisk the groin area as long as the police have no reason to believe the suspect will object to such on religious grounds.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q3: Which is true about containers?
A)They can only
Q4: In California v.Acevedo (1991),the Court ruled that
Q5: The Fourth Amendment particularity requirement for search
Q6: Which of the following is NOT one
Q7: In U.S.v.Robinson (1973),the police had stopped the
Q8: In Knowles v.Iowa,concerning an instance where a
Q9: According to the Supreme Court's decision in
Q10: In Wilson v.Arkansas,the Supreme Court unanimously decided
Q11: Police ordinarily seek consent to search:
A)when
Q11: The reasonableness of searches pursuant to search
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents