I'm asking for your assistance/advice about a college writing project that I have to turn in on (or by) Nov. 3 (2009), The project is meant to explore the depth of my knowledge of Constitutional Law (LA-50 to be precise). According to the assignment sheet, in order to succeed I must have a strong understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court decisions that we have studied so far. And so far, we have studied Gitlow v. New York, FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, Texas v. Johnson, and Prueyard Shopping Center v. Robbins. Basically, if you take them together, these cases tell us about the Freedom of Speech protection (and are there good reasons for the government to allow some limitations on this right).

So now, I have to read up about this case concerning Avery Lawrence, who was arrested for murder. While Lawrence was being held in jail, the police sent an undercover officer named Jamal Smith into Lawrence's cell. Smith was disguised as an inmate, who was being held on a drug charge. At the time, Lawrence didn't know that Smith was an undercover cop. While talking to each other for several hours, Smith asked Lawrence about whether or not he'd killed anybody. Lawrence proceeded to make statements that implicated himself in the crime of murder.

Later at the trial, the prosectution wanted to call Jamal Smith as a witness. The plans were to have him testify about the substance of his jail converstaion with Avery Lawrence. So basically, I'm being asked to play the role of trial judge. I must decide whether Smith's testimony should be allowed or suppressed. I also must explain my reasoning, using past cases as my authority.