Scott Mayo worked as a bartender at The Local Watering Hole. One night at work, Scott got into an argument with Basil Scowen. Mayo owed Scowen $1500.00. The argument heated up and, after Scowen picked up a beer bottle threateningly and appeared to be intoxicated, Mayo grabbed a pistol kept behind the bar and fired at Scowen, killing him. Mayo says Scowen told him, I am going to kill you, and what he believed was imminent danger from Scowen. Mayo was placed under arrest. He was not read his rights. He was transported to the local county jail. The prosecution witnesses are the police officer, who came to the scene and took statements from Mayo, and a frequent bar customer, Dawn Dietz, who witnessed some of what happened. The defense witnesses are the defendant, Mayo, and Joe, the fireman, who was outside and saw some of the action through the window while sitting on the patio.
Using the facts provided to you in the week one discussion #2 (refer to attched doc for details about last week), answer the following questions :
1) Did the police have probable cause to arrest Mayo?
2) Did law enforcement violate Mayo’s constitutional rights? If yes, explain how. If not, explain why.
3) Were the police required to read Mayo his Miranda rights? Discuss why.
Read Attched doc for details on the case study. (Its about 300 words long over all)
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|