LEGAL OFFICE MEMORANDUMTo: Supervising AttorneyFrom: Junior AssociateDate: June 19th, 2019Ref: State of MD v. BrownQUESTIONS PRESENTEDUnder Maryland law 1) Is the evidence seized within the Manga’s’ residence and on our client and other occupants admissible against our client in the pending criminal trial; and 2) Is the evidence sufficient to convict our client of distribution of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance and/or wearing, carrying and/or transporting a handgun?SHORT ANSWER1) Likely yes, but only evidence collected after the officers received consent to search thepremises. The observation of the actions of the occupants in the residence prior to the officer receiving consent to enter would likely be inadmissible in court due to the occupants being protected by the Fourth Amendment. Once Mr. Manga granted the officers access, he waived his Fourth Amendment rights and any evidence collected thereafter would be collected in conjunction with a lawful search. 2) Likely no. If the eyewitness testimony of the officers’ observations prior to receiving consent to search the residence is suppressed during the trial, the only admissible evidence seized in relation to our client is the money and scale found on his person, as well as possibly one count of the wearing, carrying and/or transporting of a handgun for the weapon found between the couch cushions near his person.