Assume that you are the law clerk for a judge, and that the following case is before her. Your court is the Confusion Court of Appeals, which is located in the state of Confusion, our 51st state.

People v.Pervert, Docket number 01-5421

On August 1, 2000, Officer Nosey of the Confusion Highway Patrol saw a red truck towing a large camper and driving a few miles under the speed limit. As Nosey approached the truck, it slowed even more and appeared to weave and shake a little. Nosey became suspicious that the driver might be intoxicated and pulled the truck over.

Nosey asked the driver, Peter Pervert, to accompany her to the partol car, which Pervert did. While Nosey was checking Pervert's license, registration, and criminal history, she questioned him. Nosey did not smell alcohol on Pervert's breath, nor did he in any other way appear intoxicated. However, Pervert appeared very nervous: his hands shook, he avoided eye contact, and is voice cracked once. He said he was on his way to visit relatives in California, that he had no fixed address and lived in the camper, and that he had no criminal history. When the checks were complete, Pervert's license and registration were clear, but he did have two prior arrests for theft. Pervert initially denied those arrests, but then later admitted that he was arrested once for stealing beer. He also changed his story about the purpose of the trip, and stated that, in fact, he was on his way to obtain a job in Nevada.

Nosey then asked Pervert whether he had any drugs in the camper. He said no, he did not use drugs. She asked whether she could search the camper, but he refused, stating that he didn't want anyone in his home. So Nosey told him that she would have a canine unit inspect the camper. He said "fine." When she called for a canine unit, she learned that none was immediately available, but asked that one be sent anyway. The two waited in the partol car for 45 minutes until a canine unit arrived. Nosey never told Pervert he was free to leave.

The drug-sniffing dog alerted to the left rear camper wheel, but the officers could find no drugs on or near the wheel. So they told Pervert to unlock the camper door so they could search the inside of the camper near the wheel. The officers entered the camper, but did not find evidence of drugs anywhere near where the dog had alerted. However, when Officer Nosey opened a cabinet that was near the wheel, she found a stack of pictures of children posed in sexually provocative ways. No drugs were found in the truck or camper.

Pervert was arrested and charged with possession of child pornography. At trial, he moved to suppress the evidence, claiming that it was the fruit of an illegal search and seizure. The trial court overruled his motion and he was convicted; he now appeals.
 

PART ONE: Answer the following questions.
1. What words can be used to describe the parties, places, and things involved in this case?
2. What words could be used to describe the legal issues in this case?
3. What research leads are there?

PART TWO:
Assume that the judge has requested that you write a legal memorandum concerning this case. Describe in detail (and in order) exactly what steps you would take to research this case.

PART THREE:
Find one real case that you would consult when researching these issues. Give the citation for this case. Also, read the case carefully and brief it as you would for research. Hand in a copy of that brief.

HINT:
You will really be writing a memo for the case of People v. Pervert for your next assignment. Putting a lot of careful thought into assignment 4 will make assignment 5 much easier!