1) Re—quesshoa greseaked is whedner a veasondble
Kv oined low enforcement officer could Wave concluded
Nna Yo evidence ovaidde So Xe agents ol Yoo
Lame hwy oscesled goo _conslalubed grdadihe couse tp
Npe\veve_ Anat commied Lhe _eriny of conspiracy _
ho dasdnde narcodacs ?

2): Does he cons durron _engose _constrans on federal
ageNS aver dn gost.gone Ve Uling of Smal
ehasays So sui Riv own convenience 4

2). wWra an of _reshroin\s ova person's \wherky mush
e _—_vongosed, ho \wvager on arrestees xaghals ty a
omg —ydicral dedermmakion of robot couse Speeds
Teich speedy gresentinel ond Que (rooess |

d). Did Noo dishrich court ond court of appeals eve an
AAG soy _qelnon "oy Sugeress vdnen VL was arcested
Niod_o_woxvart on Prsouss' OT DoS where Whe
wrresk was \acking _wn_gcaboalle couse ond Vho arresting ,
Q cas gossessed sul event unrelid\e and vague
_haSorma@von vot LT Wad 2agaaed or wos eagag\ag in
crm acl ok Ske Sune Ana, oweesled me,

5. id wo _drsrict - court _ond court of ages err_in deny \0g_tw) woman hp S910 _ ond lor Aisonss Yo "wdicknwal
___ @ Q sulk ot Xo won ddlay Ve hween mn arrest
xO LaS_ond ony _gresentavel vn cour vo 908 og
ttle operant pals anh th

@
groduck of _o ycekevual arr2s\ and an abusive and
__hydakwe disreq oud of sey gis ae Eedeal_Qales
ok _Crimma Qroverure H8U) 84S geedy Trial Act and
Eedecal Ques of Criminal Procedure SK) ond 5)?

Whether a reasonable law enforcement officer could have concluded that the evidence provided to the agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration constituted probable cause to believe that the petitioner had committed the crime of conspiracy to distribute narcotics