These issues are based on the case in which pro football athlete John Starr was arrested for possession of pornography and cocaine. The case also deals with a civil action case that was filed against News 13 reporter Lewis Sleeze by John Starr on the basis of Sleeze and News 13 invading his privacy. The first issue that comes up in this case is John Starr’s charge with pornography. The ruling on this issue is that it is legal for an adult to possess pornography as long as the pornography is viewed and kept in the privacy of one’s own home and the pornography is of a consenting adult. This rule is based on the case Stanley v. Georgia, which stated that obscene material such as pornography may be viewed in the privacy of ones own home. The argument…show more content… It is an issue because the cocaine was obtained through an illegal search and seizure, and it was illegal because the cocaine was located in the outbuilding but the outbuilding was not included in the search warrant, only the house and vehicles were. The current ruling on illegal search and seizures is that the evidence obtained through this illegal search and seizure is not permissible in court. This rule is based on the case Mapp v. Ohio, which stated that evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in court. The argument for the cocaine to be permissible is that the police found pornography (which they deemed illegal for some reason) and therefore had suspicion to search the outbuilding. But the argument that is more reasonable and would win the jury over is that the cocaine was obtained through an illegal search and seizure because the outbuilding was not on the search warrant, and the argument that the finding of pornography could lead to a reasonable suspicion that there would be more illicit items in the outbuilding is no good because the pornography is legal. My ruling on this case would be that the cocaine charge is dropped, because the cocaine should have been suppressed during
