Criminal Justice Chapter 8
(T/F)In Nix c. williams(1984), the US Supreme Court agreed that improperly obtained evidence can be used when it would later have been inevitably discovered without improper actions by the police
T
(T/F)Chief Justice Earl Warren established a strict code of conduct how police officers handle criminal defendants
T
(T/F)Court decisions have established that police dogs that sniff luggage in public places are no conducting searches and therefore are not subject to the requirements of the fourth amendment
T
(T/F)If a person is growing weed in plain sight, a police officer does not need a warrant to search and seize the evidence
T
(T/F)If a police officer is acting in good faith, then he or she may use evidence obtained through the use of a defective search warrant
T
(T/F)If an individual consents to a search, officers do not need probable cause or any level of suspicion to justify the search
T
(T/F)If an individual voluntarily stops to speak with an officer, he is not being "seized", because he is free to move along whenever he chooses
T
(T/F)In Nix v. Williams(1984), the U.S. Supreme Court established the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule
T
(T/F)Miranda warnings have had serious implications for law enforcement and he techniques used for interrogation
T
(T/F)Miranda warnings involve the right to counsel and the right to remain silent
T
(T/F)Miranda warnings must be read to a suspect when he or she is taken into custody
T
(T/F)One feature of the Miranda rules is that defendants have a right to have an attorney
T
(T/F)Police officers can rely on a variety of senses to justify a warrantless search
T
(T/F)Police officers need to obtain. warrant before searching the trunk of a car
T
(T/F)The Supreme Court ruled in Chimel V. California(1969) that in order to preserve evidence and protest the safety of the officer and the public after a lawful arrest. the arrestee and the immediate area around the arrestee may be searched for weapons and criminal evidence
T
(T/F)The exclusionary rule does not necessarily require that cases against defendants be dismissed when constitutional rights have been violated
T
(T/F)The exclusionary rule increases the legal protection for criminal defendants
T
(T/F)The fourth amendment contains the unreasonable search and seizure clause
T
(T/F)The fourth amendment means nothing without the exclusionary rule
T
(T/F)The fourth amendment requires that probable cause be established before a warrant is provided
T
(T/F)The totality of circumstances test is used to determine if sufficient evidence exists for a search warrant
T
(T/F)The warren court established the exclusionary rule applied to the states
T
(T/F)a top is defined as a brief interference with a persons freedom of movement
T
Which two decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court laid the foundation for Miranda v. Arizona (1966)? a. Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) and Massiah v. U. S. (1964) b. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) and Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) c. Wolf v. Colorado (1949) and Mapp v. Ohio (1961) d. Wolf v. Colorado (1949) and Rochin v. California (1952)
a. Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) and Massiah v. U. S. (1964)
Many police actions fall under the ______ Amendment. a. Fourth b. Eighth c. First d. Third
a. Fourth
(T/F)An arrest would be an example of a seizure
T
(MC)A brief interference with a persons freedom of movement of the duration that can be measured in minutes is called... a. search. b. stop. c. arrest. d. interrogation
. B. Stop
In what case did the U.S. Supreme Court decide that the plain view doctrine permits the officers to notice and use as evidence the items that are visible to them when they are in a location that they are permitted to be in? a. Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971) b. Hester v. U.S. (1924) c. Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) d. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
A. Coolige V. New Hampshire(1971)
51. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the stop-and-frisk exception, whereby a police officer could pat down a suspicious person without a warrant, in the landmark case of a. Mapp v. Ohio (1961). b. Terry v. Ohio (1968). c. Chimel v. California (1969). d. Miranda v. Arizona (1966).
B. Terry v. Ohio(1968)
(T/F)when officers are in hot pursuit of a fleeing suspected felon, they need to stop to seek a warrant and thereby risk permitting the suspect to get away
F
Which is a sense that cannot be used to justify a warrantless search? a. Touch b. Sound c. Sight d. Intuition
D. Intuition
(T/F) Police officers can conduct a warrant search without probable cause
F
(T/F)A pat down by an officer is not considered a warrantless search
F
(T/F)According to eh Pennsylvania board of pardons and parole v. Scott(1998), improperly obtained evidence cannot be used at parole revocation proceedings
F
(T/F)Consent searches are unconstitutional under the third amendment
F
(T/F)Even if a police officer is acting in the interests of public safety, he or she may obtain a warrant before searching an area
F
(T/F)In a pat down by am officer items that are identifiable by touch cannot be seized as evidence
F
(T/F)Miranda warnings must be issued in written form and signed or initialed by the suspect
F
(T/F)Miranda warnings were established by the US Supreme Court in Weeks v. US(1914)
F
(T/F)Police officers can use stop and frisk suspects only if they have reasonable suspicion
F
(T/F)Police officers cannot rely on smell as a sense in conducting a warrantless search
F
(T/F)Police officers must provide Miranda warnings if they approach someone on the street and begin questioning
F
(T/F)Searches are not permissible if a police helicopter flies overhead and witnesses illegal activity
F
(T/F)Stops may be justified by probable cause
F
(T/F)The App v. Ohio(1961)case forces the exclusionary rule to apply to both federal and state cases
F
(T/F)The fourth amendment requires that reasonable suspicion be established before a warrant is provided
F
(T/F)Unexplained bulges in clothing or awkwardness in walking are examples behavioral analysis
F
(T/F)A police officer would likely need a warrant for searches not conducted in plain view
T
(T/F)According to Miranda V. Arizona(1966), the law enforcement must inform the individual in custody of his of her right to an attorney
T
How did the U.S. Supreme Court rule in the recent Arizona v. Gant case on searches? a. It upheld the ruling of the Arizona Supreme Court that the search of Gant's vehicle was an unreasonable search. b. It reversed the ruling of the Arizona Supreme Court and upheld the search by officers as reasonable. c. It did not rule on the issue, but remanded the case back the Arizona State Supreme Court. d. It upheld the ruling of the Arizona Supreme Court that the search was a reasonable search.
a. It upheld the ruling of the Arizona Supreme Court that the search of Gant's vehicle was an unreasonable search.
The U.S. Supreme Court created the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule in the case of a. Nix v. Williams (1980). b. West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1935). c. Weeks v. U.S. (1914). d. Brown v. Mississippi (1936).
a. Nix v. Williams (1980).
What is the purpose of allowing searches after lawful arrests? a. To ensure the safety of officers b. To make sure the arrestee does not flee c. To ensure the arrestee shows the proper respect to the police d. To make sure the arrest proceeds smoothly
a. To ensure the safety of officers
Officer Goldman responds to a call of an active shooter during a home invasion at a local residence. Officer Goldman arrives on the scene and quickly surveys the residence. He and his partner immediately enter the home and see the suspect. They command the suspect to drop his weapon, and the suspect responds by dropping the weapon. Officer Goldman arrests the suspect and searches him. Once the suspect is taken into custody, Officer Goldman immediately searches him. He is allowed to do this without a warrant due to: a. search incident to a lawful arrest. b. consent. c. exigent circumstances. d. the exclusionary rule.
a. search incident to a lawful arrest.
Terry v. Ohio permitted officers the ability to pat down clothing of people on the streets if there is reasonable suspicion of dangerous criminal activity, which is referred to as a ________ search. a. stop-and-frisk b. stop-and-pat down c. stop-and-seize d. stop-and-interrogate
a. stop-and-frisk
Officer Castro notices a car in front of him driving at a slow speed. The driver seems to be driving erratically. Officer Castro activates his blue lights and attempts to pull the car over. The driver continues to drive for approximately two additional miles before pulling over. When Officer Castro slowly approaches the car, he smells what seems to be a heavy odor of marijuana. The driver has dilated eyes and slurred speech. There are four individuals in the car. Officer Castro intended for this traffic stop to be a brief seizure, which would be considered a(n) a. stop. b. search. c. arrest. d. interrogation.
a. stop.
Which doctrine permits officers to notice and use as evidence the items that are visible to them when they are in a location that they are permitted to be in? a. Plain view doctrine b. Public safety doctrine c. Exigent circumstances doctrine d. Stop and frisk doctrine
a. plain view doctrine
Officer Castro notices a car in front of him driving at a slow speed. The driver seems to be driving erratically. Officer Castro activates his blue lights and attempts to pull the car over. The driver continues to drive for approximately two additional miles before pulling over. When Officer Castro slowly approaches the car, he smells what seems to be a heavy odor of marijuana. The driver has dilated eyes and slurred speech. There are four individuals in the car. 80. Officer Castro required that the car in question be pulled over. Typically, this could be considered a(n) a. search. b. seizure. c. interrogation. d. arrest
b. seizure.
In which case did the U.S. Supreme Court conclude that a suspect being questioned cannot assert his or her right to remain silent by remaining silent in the face of continued questioning by the officer? a. Roper v. Simmons b. Berghuis v. Thompson c. Florida v. Powell d. New York v. Quarles
b. Berghuis v. Thompson
Detective Smith is working on an active sexual assault case. She has just recently received DNA results back from the lab. The results specifically pinpoint the person of interest as the suspect. Detective Smith has obtained an arrest warrant and is hoping that the suspect will give a full confession. Detective Smith obtained a search warrant based on probable cause. The information most pertinent to the issuance of the search warrant was likely the a. expectation of a confession. b. DNA evidence. c. the officer's good-standing with the judge. d. past criminal history of the suspect.
b. DNA evidence.
Miranda rights are drawn from the a. Fourth and Fifth Amendments. b. Fifth and Sixth Amendments. c. Seventh and Eighth Amendments. d. Eighth and Ninth Amendments.
b. Fifth and Sixth Amendments.
Based on the ruling set forth in Berghuis v. Thompson, what must a suspect do to end questioning? a. Immediately remain silent. b. Immediately state that he or she is asserting the right to remain silent. c. Answer some questions and not others. d. Request additional time to respond at a later point.
b. Immediately state that he or she is asserting the right to remain silent.
Officer Goldman responds to a call of an active shooter during a home invasion at a local residence. Officer Goldman arrives on the scene and quickly surveys the residence. He and his partner immediately enter the home and see the suspect. They command the suspect to drop his weapon, and the suspect responds by dropping the weapon. Officer Goldman arrests the suspect and searches him. Which aspect of the law allowed the officer to enter the house? a. A warrant. b. Probable cause. c. Reasonable suspicion. d. Just cause.
b. Probable cause.
Which of the following is contained in the Fifth Amendment? a. Right to counsel b. Right to remain silent c. Free speech clause d. Warrant clause
b. Right to remain silent
Which Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court began to create exceptions to the exclusionary rule? a. Earl Warren b. Warren Burger c. Harlan Stone d. William Howard Taft
b. Warren Burger
Detective Smith is working on an active sexual assault case. She has just recently received DNA results back from the lab. The results specifically pinpoint the person of interest as the suspect. Detective Smith has obtained an arrest warrant and is hoping that the suspect will give a full confession. Detective Smith is going to take the suspect into custody, where he feels as though he is not free to leave. Detective Smith is making a(n) a. affidavit. b. arrest. c. search. d. warrant.
b. arrest.
Officer Goldman responds to a call of an active shooter during a home invasion at a local residence. Officer Goldman arrives on the scene and quickly surveys the residence. He and his partner immediately enter the home and see the suspect. They command the suspect to drop his weapon, and the suspect responds by dropping the weapon. Officer Goldman arrests the suspect and searches him. Officer Goldman immediately entered the home without obtaining a warrant. He was allowed to do this based on the requirement of a. consent. b. exigent circumstances. c. arrest. d. seizure.
b. exigent circumstances.
In order for an officer to arrest a suspect, the officer must have a. a warrant. b. probable cause. c. reasonable suspicion. d. just cause.
b. probable cause.
When an urgent situation of significant social importance outweighs the necessity of respecting individuals' rights, this is referred to as the _______ exception. a. plain view b. public safety c. exigent circumstances d. stop-and-frisk
b. public safety
Officer Goldman responds to a call of an active shooter during a home invasion at a local residence. Officer Goldman arrives on the scene and quickly surveys the residence. He and his partner immediately enter the home and see the suspect. They command the suspect to drop his weapon, and the suspect responds by dropping the weapon. Officer Goldman arrests the suspect and searches him. After the suspect was taken into custody and the victims were taken to receive medical care, Officer Goldman's partners most likely would need to obtain a(n) _________ to collect all the remaining evidence to prosecute the case. a. arrest warrant b. search warrant c. clearance waiver d. consent waiver
b. search warrant
The U.S. Supreme Court recently repeated its endorsement of the Miranda requirements in a. Kyllo v. U.S. (2001). b. Maryland v. Wilson (1997). c. Dickerson v. U.S. (2000). d. Romer v. Evans (1995).
c. Dickerson v. U.S. (2000).
Who wrote the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Miranda v. Arizona (1966)? a. Hugo Black b. William Brennan c. Earl Warren d. Thurgood Marshall
c. Earl Warren
Detective Smith is working on an active sexual assault case. She has just recently received DNA results back from the lab. The results specifically pinpoint the person of interest as the suspect. Detective Smith has obtained an arrest warrant and is hoping that the suspect will give a full confession. Detective Smith must inform the suspect of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. The U.S. Supreme Court guaranteed this right in which ruling? a. Mapp v. Ohio b. Wren v. United States c. Miranda v. Arizona d. Michigan v. Long
c. Miranda v. Arizona
Which of the following is not a factor in determining if suspicion exists to justify a search by a Custom and Border Patrol officer? a. Behavioral analysis b. Observational techniques c. Native language d. K-9 Unit
c. Native language
Which statement is true concerning the U.S. Supreme Court's treatment of the exclusionary rule in the 1980s? a. The Court expanded the rule to protect criminal defendants. b. The Court abolished the rule. c. The Court created exceptions to limit the applicability of the rule. d. The Court did not change the rule in terms of its application.
c. The Court created exceptions to limit the applicability of the rule.
According to the ___________ doctrine, officers are permitted to search and to seize evidence, without a warrant, on private property beyond the area immediately surrounding the house. a. plain view b. plain feel c. open fields d. seizure
c. open fields
Under the plain view doctrine, there is a lost expectation of _______ when items are in plain sight. a. innocence b. suspicion c. privacy d. freedom
c. privacy
Officer Castro notices a car in front of him driving at a slow speed. The driver seems to be driving erratically. Officer Castro activates his blue lights and attempts to pull the car over. The driver continues to drive for approximately two additional miles before pulling over. When Officer Castro slowly approaches the car, he smells what seems to be a heavy odor of marijuana. The driver has dilated eyes and slurred speech. There are four individuals in the car. When Officer Castro pulled the car over after suspicious behavior, he encountered a strong smell of a well-known drug that he has had significant experience with prior to this case. The strong presence of the smell of this drug gives Officer Castro enough ________ to search the vehicle. a. reasonable suspicion b. hunch c. probable cause d. proof beyond a reasonable doubt
c. probable cause
A significant deprivation of liberty because a person is taken into police custody, transported to the police station or jail, and processed into the criminal justice system is called a(n) a. search. b. stop. c. arrest. d. interrogation
c. Arrest
In what circumstance is the totality of circumstances used? a. To determine whether an offender is guilty b. To determine whether to indict a suspect c. To determine whether probable cause exists d. To determine whether police acted appropriately
c. to determine whether probable cause exists
Which is true concerning search warrants? a. Police officers must provide reliable information when obtaining a search warrant. b. Police must show probable cause. c. Judges issue search warrants based on information provided by the police. d. All of the above are true.
d. All of the above are true.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that statements produced after police assaulted suspects were inadmissible in a. Myers v. U.S. (1923). b. West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1935). c. Chimel v. California (1969). d. Brown v. Mississippi (1936).
d. Brown v. Mississippi (1936).
Which of the following does not allow the use of the exclusionary rule? a. Murder trial b. Federal court c. State court with no appellate system d. Grand jury proceeding
d. Grand jury proceeding
The U.S. Supreme Court established that criminal defendants must be read their rights in a. Mapp v. Ohio (1961). b. Terry v. Ohio (1968). c. Chimel v. California (1969). d. Miranda v. Arizona (1966).
d. Miranda v. Arizona (1966).
Which is false concerning search warrants? a. Police officers must provide reliable information when obtaining a search warrant. b. Police officers must identify the "things" to be searched. c. Police officers are allowed to conduct warrantless searches under certain circumstances. d. Police officers do need a search warrant, even if a person waives his or her Fourth Amendment rights.
d. Police officers do need a search warrant, even if a person waives his or her Fourth Amendment rights.
Which is not part of the Miranda warnings? a. The right to an attorney during interrogation b. The right to remain silent c. The notice that any statement that you decide to make can be used against you in court d. The right to a speedy trial
d. The right to a speedy trial
The U.S. Supreme Court created the good faith exception in the case of a. Nix v. Williams (1980). b. Hester v. U.S. (1924). c. Texas v. Johnson (1989). d. U.S. v. Leon (1984).
d. U.S. v. Leon (1984).
Which is contained in the Fourth Amendment? a. Right to bear arms b. Privilege against self-incrimination c. Right to an attorney d. Warrant clause
d. Warrant clause
The U.S. Supreme Court created the exclusionary rule in the case of a. Mapp v. Ohio (1961). b. Miranda v. Arizona (1966). c. Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993). d. Weeks v. U.S.(1914).
d. Weeks v. U.S.(1914).
The U.S. Supreme Court applied the Fourth Amendment to the states in a. Mapp v. Ohio (1961). b. Terry v. Ohio (1968). c. Chimel v. California (1969). d. Wolf v. Colorado (1949).
d. Wolf v. Colorado (1949).
. According to U.S. v. Drayton (2002), police officers a. must notify citizens that they have the right to say "no" to a search. b. must notify citizens of their right against self-incrimination. c. must notify citizens of their right to an attorney. d. are not obligated to notify citizens that they have a right to say "no" to a search.
d. are not obligated to notify citizens that they have a right to say "no" to a search.
Officer Castro notices a car in front of him driving at a slow speed. The driver seems to be driving erratically. Officer Castro activates his blue lights and attempts to pull the car over. The driver continues to drive for approximately two additional miles before pulling over. When Officer Castro slowly approaches the car, he smells what seems to be a heavy odor of marijuana. The driver has dilated eyes and slurred speech. There are four individuals in the car. Officer Castro would not need probable cause to search the vehicle if the driver gave Officer Castro permission to search. This would be known as a(n) _________ search. a. exigent circumstances b. plain view c. stop-and-frisk d. consent
d. consent
Detective Smith is working on an active sexual assault case. She has just recently received DNA results back from the lab. The results specifically pinpoint the person of interest as the suspect. Detective Smith has obtained an arrest warrant and is hoping that the suspect will give a full confession. The suspect can claim his constitutional right against ____________ when Detective Smith interrogates him. a. questioning b. searches c. seizures d. self-incrimination
d. self-incrimination
Miranda warnings involve all of the following except: a. the right to an attorney. b. the right to remain silent. c. the exclusion of statements made that can be used against a suspect. d. the right to sound legal advice.
d. the right to sound legal advice.
Officer Castro notices a car in front of him driving at a slow speed. The driver seems to be driving erratically. Officer Castro activates his blue lights and attempts to pull the car over. The driver continues to drive for approximately two additional miles before pulling over. When Officer Castro slowly approaches the car, he smells what seems to be a heavy odor of marijuana. The driver has dilated eyes and slurred speech. There are four individuals in the car. Officer Castro would like to look inside the car. He could legally enter the car without a warrant by a. claiming nonexigent circumstances b. calling for backup as he examines the inside of the car. c. demanding the driver to let him in. d. wanting to see the vehicle registration number.
d. wanting to see the vehicle registration number.
