Criminal Law Bench Memo

I have a bench memo due in 1.5 weeks for research and writing.

Here is the prompt (Use all of the facts, in an IRAC format, don't alter the facts)

Using the fact pattern below and the research you have done throughout the course, your task
is to write an objective bench memo for your presiding judge to aid their decision in whether to grant
defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence seized from the house during the search. You should
incorporate as much binding and persuasive authority as you feel necessary to sufficiently advise the
judge on both the inevitable discovery doctrine and the emergency aid doctrine. Your analysis should
address authority that supports the prosecution on each issue, and analysis that supports the defendant
on each issue.

As for format, you should provide a brief introduction, a recitation of the facts, and a brief
identification of the issues presented, before analyzing the issues. For organization, headings are
strongly encouraged, but not mandatory. You may recall from class, that some of the headings we
discussed are not necessary for this assignment because you are not provided with a record or briefs
from the parties. You may use all, or some, of the facts provided, but if you end up using the fact in the
analysis, it should be in the fact summary. Higher scoring exams will use all of the facts. You are free to
reorganize the facts as you see fit. While the discussion does not need to be persuasive, you should
reach a recommendation on each issue discussed. Each recommendation should be well-reasoned and
logically follow from the analysis. You are expected to provide recommendations on both the inevitable
discovery doctrine and the emergency aid doctrine.

There is a 10-page, 12-point, double-spaced, page limit. There is no minimum length. Memos
will be scored based on all aspects that this course covered: (1) citations; (2) analysis of relevant legal
authorities; and (3) grammar, punctuation, and writing mechanics.

At 1:03 p.m., the police dispatch reported shots fired at a home in Sausilito, California. Reports indicated
that an unidentified male had been shot once, multiple shots had been fired, and the three suspects
were driving a four-door Cadillac. Lieutenant Richardson was the first official on the scene, arriving
about 10 minutes after the initial report. Richardson arrived in an unmarked vehicle and wearing
plainclothes. Richardson could not identify the suspected vehicle, so he walked up to the front of the
home, where a man was providing first aid to a child who had been shot. Another individual, Savalos,
was standing on the porch, also bleeding from his shoulder and the top of his head.

The child was unable to tell Richardson any details, while exhibiting distress and lapses in consciousness.
Savalos was unable to describe the suspects or the circumstances of the shooting. Richardson eventually
was able to gather that three suspects were involved in the shooting, and drove off in a Cadillac.
Richardson observed blood on the front door, including smeared blood and blood droplets around the
door handle. Richardson believed that one of the victims had entered the home or departed the home
at some point after being shot. Richardson asked whether there was anyone inside the home. Savalos
failed to respond for approximately 30 seconds, before indicating that he did not think anyone else was
inside. Richardson asked Savalos two more times whether there was anyone else in the home. Savalos
stated each time, but with hesitation, that there was not.

Throughout this time, the child was screaming and asking for help. Richardson tried to assist in giving
the child aid. Savalos also suffered from the effects of his injuries and became progressively more
frantic. Emergency personnel and additional law enforcement soon arrived. At this time, Richardson
began to question whether Savalos had been truthful about the presence of additional people.
Richardson could not hear any sounds from inside the residence and the blinds were closed. Richardson
made a judgment call to verify whether more victims or possible suspects were inside the house.
Richardson asked whether the keys around Savalos’ neck were to the residence. Richardson explained
that it was necessary that he secure the scene to determine if there were other victims or suspects on
site. Savalos explained that those were the keys to the house, but he declined to let Richardson enter
the home. Richardson cautioned Savalos that law enforcement would have to kick in the door. Savalos
then relented and let Richardson enter. Officers announced their presence, and entered the house to
look for victims or suspects. No one answered the officers when they announced their entry. Officers
cleared downstairs first, before heading upstairs for additional victims. Officers did not see any blood or
obvious signs of distress inside the home.

One of the arriving officers, Brown, found a locked bedroom door. Brown announced her presence
outside of the door. Brown heard no response and subsequently kicked in the door. Brown immediately
smelled marijuana, and saw an electronic scale and various drug paraphernalia. Brown contacted a
detective on the scene and executed an affidavit for a search warrant. After executing a search warrant
through the remainder of the home, Brown also found two unregistered firearms in a duffle bag, and
additional paraphernalia in the garage. The owner of the home was not present at the time of either
search.