lesser sentencing (Arizona). If the case goes to trial, the criminal defense attorney tries to convince the jury there is reasonable doubt about his clientÆs guilt. If the client is found guilty, he can help formulate sentencing programs tailored to a clientÆs specific needs.
Qu.2 One issue with the arrest of Ron in this case is whether or not he was read his Miranda rights before he was questioned by the officer. Another question is if the officer had stopped Sam for a traffic offense, why had he so closely observed his passenger as to recognize him as a bank robbery suspect? Because it was a dark, stormy night he would have had to deliberately shine his flashlight onto the passengerÆs face to be able to recognize him, and he would have no reason to do this since Sam had apparently been cooperative.
The first question is whether the officer had probable cause to look at the passenger in the car closely enough to recognize him, on a dark, stormy night, as a wanted robbery suspect. This would have taken a close examination and there does not appear to have been any reason to do so. The officer had stopped Sam for speeding, he had complied with the officer and was giving him the needed information, so who else was in the car was of no concern. This may be grounds for ôillegal search and seizureö because of no probable cause.
There was no reason to search the car for evidence of a crime, just because the car was exceeding the speed limit. The office had no probable cause to believe Sam was involved in anything legal. After he had arrested Ron, the officer gave Sam a ticket for speeding and let him go, not retaining him for aiding and abetting a fugitive which he could have done. This whole arrest and booking was mishandled and this may also be grounds for dismissal of the case.
Also, if the officer recognized the suspect, he should have immediately placed him under arrest and read him his Miranda rights ...