Chapter 6
According to the waiver test of consent:
a consent search is valid only if the person consenting voluntarily and knowingly waives the Fourth Amendment rights.
Which of the following is NOT an exception to the warrant requirement approved by SCOTUS?
a search based on an informant tip
In U.S. v. Robinson (1973), the police had stopped the defendant for driving with a revoked driver's permit. SCOTUS's ruling with respect to the legality of the search of the defendant is important, because it held that:
a search incident to a full custody arrest may be conducted regardless of the likelihood of finding weapons or evidence on the arrestee's person.
Consent that takes place when one person in fact has the legal authority to consent to a search of the home and possessions of another person is called:
actual authority consent.
Which of the following would NOT justify an emergency search?
an inconvenient location for waiting with a suspect for a warrant
According to the Court of Appeals decision in United States v. Rodney
consent to search a person includes consent to frisk the groin area.
(T/F): A search warrant must specifically identify "the things to be seized." This particularity requirement may not be met by specifying an entire class of items.
false
(T/F): If a suspect is arrested in a vehicle, police, as part of the search incident to the arrest, may search the vehicle's trunk.
false
(T/F): The scope of a search incident to arrest includes the entire place where the suspect is arrested.
false
What is the name of an emergency created by the need to pursue a fleeing suspect?
hot pursuit
In California v. Acevedo (1991), SCOTUS ruled that officers with probable cause but without warrants can search containers inside vehicles:
if the container isn't an essential part of the vehicle
New York v. Belton (1981) extended the Chimel rule to:
interior vehicle searches, if the individual arrested is outside the car.
According to SCOTUS in Chimel v. California, involving the search of a house incident to an arrest for burglary of a coin shop:
it is not reasonable to search an entire house incident to a lawful arrest.
According to the SCOTUS holding in Arizona v. Gant (2009), police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest, only if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search, or if:
it is reasonable to believe that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest.
What is the name of the practice of officers going to a person's residence, with or without any objective basis, and knocking on the door so as to obtain plain views of home interiors, question the residents, or ask for consent to search?
knock-and-talk technique
According to the empirical research about consent searches:
lower courts find that consent was voluntary in all but the most extreme cases.
Which is true about containers?
no warrant is needed if the container is found in a car the police have probable cause to search, and the container is a likely place to find items that police are searching for.
The "grabbable area" allows police to search:
only the area within the suspect's immediate control or "arm's length."
In Wilson v. Arkansas, SCOTUS unanimously decided that:
ordinarily, the Fourth Amendment requires that police knock and announce.
Which of the following is NOT needed to satisfy the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement?
reasonable suspicion
The Fourth Amendment particularity requirement for search warrants
requires that the warrant specifically describe the place to be searched and the things to be seized.
When police arrest a suspect based on probable cause, but then conduct a search without probable cause or a warrant, the search is called a:
search incident to arrest.
The following are all examples of emergency search situations, except:
searching a home with a suspected drug dealer inside.
In Illinois v. Rodriquez (1990), SCOTUS applied what test to uphold a search of Edward Rodriquez's apartment?
the apparent authority third-party consent test
Under the holding in Chimel v. California (1969), a leading SCOTUS case on searches incident to arrest, the police must limit a thorough search incident to arrest to:
the arrestee's person and the area within the arrestee's immediate control.
The reasonableness of searches conducted with search warrants depends on:
the existence of probable cause, the extent of the search, the particularity of the warrant, and the manner in which the police enter the place to be searched.
The vehicle exception to the warrant requirement is based upon:
the inherent mobility of the vehicle, and the reduced expectation of privacy in vehicles.
In Wyoming v. Houghton, concerning the search of a passenger's purse for drugs based on probable cause that drugs are in the vehicle, SCOTUS declared that:
the police may inspect passengers' belongings that are capable of concealing the object of the search.
The criminal procedure value of balancing privacy and community safety weighs heavily on which side of the balance?
the privacy side
(T/F): Searches of homes require warrants to be "reasonable."
true
(T/F): The knock-and-announce rule's origins come from English common law.
true
In order to conduct a consent search of a person, an officer must have:
voluntary consent to search.
Police ordinarily seek consent to search:
when they do not have probable cause and cannot get a warrant.
Concerning third-party consent to search, in which of the following situations can one person consent to a search for the other person?
A factory owner consenting to a search of items on top of an employee's workbench.
