Darren's car was stopped by Officer Jones for a minor traffic violation. The officer recognized Darren as a suspect in a multimillion-dollar bank fraud scheme that had just been discovered by the authorities. She placed Darren under arrest and gave him Miranda warnings. She then asked for permission to search the trunk of the car. Darren nodded and unlocked the trunk. Officer Jones searched the trunk and discovered a bag containing what appeared to be cocaine in a compartment in the trunk. When later tests determined that it was cocaine, the authorities added a charge of transporting illegal narcotics to Darren's indictment. At a preliminary hearing, Darren moved to have evidence of the cocaine excluded as the result of a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Should the court grant Darren's motion?
A. Yes, because one taken into custody cannot give valid consent to a search that would otherwise require a warrant.
B. Yes, because the search exceeded the scope of a permissible search incident to a lawful arrest.
C. No, if the court finds that Darren's consent was voluntary under the circumstances.
D. No, because persons have a lesser expectation of privacy in their vehicles for purposes of the Fourth Amendment.
Choose A, B, C or D as your solution.
C