Moot Court Qualifying Tests

Moot Court Qualifying Exercises

Site last updated on January 6, 1999.
This is a Jeanne Site.
Jeanne Curran.

Qualifying Exercises 1 and 2 Must Be Completed to Argue Before Judges and Training Attorneys

Qualifying Exercise 1 - Understanding the Primary Legal Issues

What is the black letter law on search?

There may be no search of private citizens by the government, without warrant or exigent circumstances.
Private citizens may search if they obtain a search warrant from the proper authorities.
Black letter law is the exact statute as written in the codebook.
A pat down search is permissible during a citizen's arrest if there are exigent circumstances that suggest danger to the person carrying out the arrest or other persons in the vicinity.
a and d.

May private citizens seize what they have reason to believe is contraband from other private citizens?

Only when they have actual evidence that it is contraband.
Only if they are working in close collaboration with the police.
Only if they have a properly obtained warrant.
Only if what they seize is a weapon that places them in immediate danger when they are trying to intervene in a criminal matter.
Generally not, because the police discourage self-help as creating dangerous situations. The police prefer that citizens wait for them to act.

How do you establish a nexus between state agents and private citizens?

By the totality of circumstances in the incident that led to the search and seizure.
By comparing the facts in your case to the facts in cases where courts have found a nexus.
By considering the probable intent of both the state agents and the private citizens.
By all of the indicators of the private citizens having acted under color of law.
All of the above.

How could error be "harmless" if the defendant went to jail?

If there was enough valid evidence to convict the defendant apart from the illegally seized evidence, then the error of admitting the illegal evidence is harmless.
If the appellate court decides that the evidence against the defendant is overwhelming, then it is harmless that some of it was illegally seized.
If the court could have concluded that the defendant was guilty anyway, because of earlier similar convictions, then the admission of the illegal evidence was harmless.
If this is a "third strike" case, then the defendants prior convictions count more, and the admission of questionably seized evidence is harmless.
All of the above.

On what grounds would Zelinski exclude evidence illegally seized by private security guards?

On the grounds that they acted in concert with the police.
On the grounds that they held the alleged defendant because they wanted to enforce the law.
On the grounds that the actions of the private security guards were egregious and violated the Fourth Amendment protections from illegal searches and seizures.
All of the above.
a and b.

your answers to Jeanne.

Qualifying Exercise 2 - Beginning Factual Analysis

May you use the facts from the story of the incident that led to this case?

Only if you identify to the court the page and line at which they can be found in the story.
Only if they go to explain intent.
Only if they appear in the transcript.
Only if the court includes them in its summary of facts of the case.
Only if they appear somewhere in the record where they have been sworn to under penalty of perjury.

If the private security guards believed they were helping the NARCS wouldn't that establish a nexus?

Maybe, their belief is one circumstance in the totality of circumstances.
Yes, because "wannabe" cops are trying to enforce the law and so have a nexus with the police.
Yes, because the NARCS acknowledged that belief when they gave the security guards their business card.
No, the nexus would depend upon the intent of both the security guards and the NARCS.
Yes, their belief establishes intent to enforce the law.

Did the actions of the security guards amount to a seizure?

Yes, because this was not a pat down search in conjunction with danger in an arrest.
No, because the glassine packet was in plain view.
Yes, because the guard who took it was a female, and the suspect was male. She should have waited for the male guard to take it.
No, because they had the right to take back the store's merchandize under the Merchant's Privilege.
No, because they didn't have to search his person to take it.

Since it turned out to be cocaine after all, doesn't that balance the minor transgressions of the security guards?

No. Detaining a citizen requires some supportive reasonable cause. The cocaine after the fact does not suffice.
It does not follow that a citizen's outrage or fear at being detained establish his guilt.
No. Taking a small glassine packet from his person is not minor.
No. The detention of Allwell resulted more from the security guards' enthusiasm to play wannabe cops than from facts that led to more than a mere "hunch."
All of the above.

What facts are there to establish that the guards acted under color of law?

They wore uniforms with badges that could have been mistaken for police uniforms.
They spoke with authority in asking Allwell to come to the security office.
They eagerly sought a nexus with the narcotics agents.
They treated Allwell in a manner that presumed guilt by encouraging his emotional escalation when detaining him in the lobby.
All of the above.

What facts are there to support the position that the security guards did not act under color of law?

All the facts to Question 5 could be given innocent interpretations of the guards' behavior.
Almost all security guards wear uniforms. They are rarely mistaken for police.
Guilt could have caused Allwell to create a scene when the guards detained him, just as they suspected.
Security guards are expected to be alert to dangerous situations in their environment.
The guards responded not to a single incident, but to the totality of circumstances they observed.

your answers to Jeanne.

Completion of Qualifying Exercises 1 and 2 will permit you to argue in training rounds.

BACK to Moot Court Home Page.
BACK to Dear Habermas Home Page.