In this pair of cases, the first may serve as precedent for the second. Decide whether the second case is so relevantly similar to the first that it should be decided identically. Explain your decision.First case: Federal and local officers, seeking to arrest Mr. J on a narcotics charge but having no warrant or search warrant, knocked on the door of his apartment. He asked, "Who's there?" and the reply was, "Police." He opened the door partly, keeping the chain latch on, asked what they were doing there. Before they answered, he tried to close the door, whereupon they broke in and arrested him, seizing as evidence marked money from a narcotics sale. The court ruled that the arrest was unlawful and therefore that the money was unlawfully seized: the authority of officers to break the door

Question

of a home to make an arrest is limited; the officers must first state their authority in demanding admission. Mr. J's reaction in attempting to close the door did not show with certainty that he knew that the officers were there to arrest him.Second case: Mr. A was unlawfully arrested on a burglary charge without probable cause and placed in jail. There he was observed attempting to swallow something; he was seized and forcibly searched, and a moist narcotic packet was found on the floor. He was charged with illegal possession of narcotics.

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

If unlawful arrest carries no right to search in the first case, it carries no right in the second case.