Following up on a tip that there is drug trafficking going on in a particular apartment, you knock on the door and ask if it is okay to enter. The person who answers the door identifies herself as the mother says it's okay to look around. Inside of the boy's bedroom, in a footlocker, you discover a baggie containing illegal drugs. You arrest the boy for possession. At the trial, the defense attorney argues that the person who answered the door did not have the authority to give permission for the search of the boy's bedroom because it was his "private domain." What is the result of that argument?
◦ The objection is likely to be sustained because the mother had the authority to give permission to search the open areas of the bedroom but not to open any containers.
◦ The objection will be overruled because the mother had actual authority to give permission to search the bedroom.
◦ The objection will be overruled because the mother had apparent authority to give permission to examine the footlocker.
◦ The objection will be sustained because the police officers had probable cause to examine the footlocker.
Teaching women about the safety of drug use during pregnancy is an essential component of nursing ...
Drug–Drug Interactions with Warfarin
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Pregnancy Categories
Signs and Symptoms of Drug Abusers
Ophthalmic drug administration
A Drug’s Plateau Level