This question should be answered in REAC format (Rule, Explanation, Application, Conclusion). Please include all relevant keywords, terms, and phrases when discussing each topic.
Popeye was arrested and charged with conspiracy to receive stolen property. At his arraignment, Popeye was represented by counsel. He was then released after posting bond. Following his release, Popeye resumed his job as a bartender at The Sea Shanty Shingle Pub. Three weeks before Popeye’s trial, Bluto entered the bar. After a few drinks, Bluto began conversing with Popeye, who was on duty at the time. Unknown to Popeye, Bluto was a paid police informant. During the course of their conversation, Bluto told Popeye that he had read about his arrest and questions Popeye about the names of his accomplices. Unsuspectingly, Popeye made some admissions, which Bluto then passed on, to the prosecuting attorney.
At trial, the prosecution attempts to introduce Popeye’s admissions into evidence. Popeye’s attorney moves to exclude the offer of proof.
NotepadClick anywhere in notepad to add a note
First, consider whether adversary proceedings had begun in Popeye’s case when he was approached by Bluto at the Sea Shanty Shingle Pub. Then, consider whether Bluto was acting as an agent of the police when he spoke with Popeye.