In this case, a suspect named Chad was apprehended by Officer Smith following a fight in which Chad apparently injured Andrew with a baseball bat. Officer Smith arrested Chad for aggravated assault, and while searching him for (additional) weapons, Officer Smith found crack cocaine. Subsequently, Chad was interviewed in jail by a narcotics officer, who read him his Miranda rights. During the interview, Chad confessed to murdering Thelma.
The balance of these facts indicate that both Officer Smith and the unnamed narcotics officer acted properly. On the basis of the facts as given, Chad can be charged with aggravated assault and possession of crack cocaine, with good prospects of conviction. His confession to Thelma's murder appears admissible, if supported by other facts not given. (We do not know from the statement of facts whether Thelma was actually murdered at all.) Two issues of particular relevance do deserve further examination, Officer Smith's discovery of crack cocaine while searching Chad, and his confession to Thelma's murder.
If Officer Smith had been conducting a Terry search for weapons, we would have to explore whether a reasonable person, conducting a pat-down for weapons, would be able to distinguish a "big ball" of crack from a possible weapon. However, while a Terry search is one exception to the exclusionary rule, search pursuant to a lawful arrest is another and separate exception. From the statement of facts, Officer Smith had ample probable cause to arrest Chad for aggravated assault. While his post-arrest search was specifically for weapons, the Terry standard does not apply, and Officer Smith was not restricted to searching for weapons.
We may now turn to Chad's jailhouse interview and confession. The interview was conducted by a narcotics officer, who was evidently assigned because crack cocaine had been found. It might be argued that IF the ball of crack had not been found, or w...