Minnesota v Dickerson essays

Minnesota v Dickerson essays Jurisdiction _____________________________________ 1 Statement of the Case ____________________________ 1-7 Question Presented _______________________________ 7-8 Summary of Argument ______________________________ 8-11 Analysis of Issue 1 ______________________________ 11-12 Analysis of Issue 2 ______________________________ 13-14 Conclusion _______________________________________ 14-15 Arizona vs. Hicks, 480 U.S 321 (1987) Illinois vs. Andreas, 463 U.S. 765 (1983) Michigan vs. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 n. 16 (1983) Texas vs. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 (1983) The Minnesota Supreme Court found the respondent Timothy Dickerson guilty of the possession of cocaine. The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the decision. The Supreme Court of the United States of America granted certiorari and found that contraband detected through touch shall be admissible in court. This was affirmed on June 7, 1993. On the night of November 9, 1989 two Minneapolis law enforcement officers were patrolling an area on the citys north side in a marked squad car. At 8:15 p.m. one of the patrolling police officers noticed the defendant, Timothy Dickerson, leaving a twelve-unit apartment building on Morgan Avenue North. This particular officer had often responded to calls from this building in the past regarding different drug violations. The building had notoriously been referred to as a crack house and this is partially why the officers assumed there were illegal actions occurring when the respondent was leaving the location. According to information released at the time of the trial, the defendant was walking toward the police officers vehicle when he suddenly changed direction and began running away from where they were parked. The officers began to watch him suspiciously and observed his actions while he walked down a quiet and empty alley. The officers suspected that the defendant was involved in some type of dru...