POLS4720E Final Exam
What case, in your opinion, guides the FAA in it's treatment of drone surveillance by law enforcement? In other words, which case is most closely tied to the legality of low-flying aerial surveillance without a warrant?
Florida v Riley
Which case established the "open field" doctrine?
Hester v US
Which of the following cases deals primarily with the "knock and announce" rule?
Hudson v MI
In which of the following cases does the SCOTUS deal with searches involving automobiles (in some capacity)?
Michigan v Dept of State Police v Sitz Correct Response California v Acevedo Correct Response Warden v Hayden Correct Response Arizona v Gant
Which case helped establish the "independent source" doctrine?
Murray v US
Which of the following cases involves a search that is NOT based on reasonable suspicion given by informants, but instead is based on reasonable suspicion gathered by law enforcement observation?
Terry v OH
Which case tells us that anonymous tips are able to be used in establishing reasonable suspicion?
Alabama v White
This case is sometimes referred to as the "soccer mom case". We learn from this case that law enforcement have discretion to arrest any person for any crime, even those that are only citation-based offenses.
Atwater v City of Lago Vista
Which case best reflects the "involuntariness" of the confession shown in the clip below? L.A Confidential
Brown v MS
The silver-platter doctrine was ruled unconstitutional in which case?
Elkins v US
"No Trespassing" signs are a clear indication to law enforcement that you expect privacy on your property, and thus a warrant would be required for a search to occur.
False
A nodded head is explicit enough for law enforcement to gauge a Miranda waiver.
False
According to CA v Greenwood, law enforcement may not search garbage that has been placed out for collection without a warrant.
False
All areas of a backyard are considered curtilage, as long as they are a fenced space.
False
An arrest may occur only when a warrant is involved.
False
Anonymous sources are not adequate for PC, no matter the circumstances.
False
Any emergency (exigent) circumstance permits law enforcement to proceed without a warrant in situations that might otherwise require one.
False
Chavez v Martinez clarified that Miranda warnings were a legally required rule of behavior for law enforcement rather than a rule to submit evidence at trial.
False
IRS interviews require Miranda warnings to be read if testimonial evidence is to be collected.
False
In FL v Bostick, cocaine evidence was suppressed by the SCOTUS because Mr. Bostick was legally "seized" without reasonable suspicion.
False
In Georgia, law enforcement officers may NOT use "stop and identify" responses as a factor in arrest
False
In US v Mendenhall, consent was the main explanatory factor in the SCOTUS conclusion.
False
It is not a violation of Fourth Amendment rights for states to require that persons with a driver's license who refuse to submit to a blood alcohol tests may be criminally prosecuted.
False
Kyllo v US suggests that thermal imaging by law enforcement is permissible without a warrant, under special circumstances.
False
Law enforcement always need a warrant to search your garbage.
False
Law enforcement must always obtain a warrant if they want to use evidence from recorded conversations between friends/ acquaintances.
False
Miranda warnings must be given verbatim by law enforcement if confessions are to be legally obtained.
False
Once the Miranda right is waived, it may not be reasserted at a later time.
False
SCOTUS caselaw gives some hard and fast time limits for law enforcement encounters that may be considered stops (not arrests).
False
Strip searches are permissible in jails with just reasonable suspicion.
False
Strip searches are reasonable in schools with just reasonable suspicion.
False
The Constitution, specifically the Fourth Amendment, expressly lays out the exclusionary rule.
False
The Court upholds federal law that recognizes a "voluntary" exception to the Miranda requirement in Dickerson v US.
False
The fact that a suspect responds to law enforcement is the appropriate measure of whether he/ she has been interrogated, as opposed to the intentions of law enforcement to obtain a response.
False
US v Leon deals with the "inevitable discovery" exception to the exclusionary rule.
False
Wiretapping has always been considered a search subject to the warrant requirement.
False
What does the SCOTUS decision in Katz v US (1967) tells us? Choose all that apply.
Fourth Amendment protects people Correct Response Fourth Amendment protects tangible and intangible Correct Response Fourth Amendment is based on a subject and objective reasonable expectation of privacy Correct Response Fourth Amendment wasn't intended to be used as a barrier to law enforcement
In Oliver v US, what measures did Oliver take to make sure that his field remained private? Choose all that apply.
Guard dogs Correct AnswerCorrect Response Posted no trespassing signs Correct Response Security cameras
In this case, the court approves "stop and identify" laws.
Hiibel v NV
Which of the following cases does NOT involve a suspect who is fleeing or resisting cooperation with law enforcement?
IL v MacArthur
In which case is the SCOTUS asked whether the reliability of anonymous tips are acceptable PC?
Illinois v Gates
In what case does a "reasonable expectation of privacy" become the standard to assess whether a search has occurred?
Katz v US
A "police-created" exigency is the subject of which case?
Kentucky v King
Which of the following identifies the "public safety exception" to the Miranda requirement?
NY v Quarles
In what case was wiretapping NOT considered a search, subject to Fourth Amendment protections?
Olmstead v US
In Florida v Jardines, the majority opinion veers from a traditional "privacy" right, and instead focuses on this right.
Property rights
According to our caselaw examples, which of the following does NOT indicate reasonable suspicion?
Race
The Fourth Amendment gives us what criteria for search and seizure procedure? Choose all that apply.
Searches must not be unreasonable Correct Response Searches must be performed in a timely manner Correct Response Searches should involve a warrant Correct Response Searches and warrants should be based on probable cause
Escobedo differs from Miranda in that the right to counsel referenced in Escobedo is derived from what right?
Sixth Amendment
In what case did the SCOTUS rule that psychological coercion by law enforcement makes a confession "involuntary"?
Spano v NY
Which of the following represents the "involuntariness" of the confession in the clip shown below? The Untouchables
Spano v NY
Which of the following was NOT a reason that the SCOTUS gave for not requiring Miranda warnings at traffic stops?
They involve automobiles so different rules apply
The general limit for all exigent circumstance exceptions has to do with:
Time
An individual may be stopped and searched with reasonable suspicion IF AND ONLY IF it is related to safety.
True
Avoidance behavior may establish reasonable suspicion.
True
Because a front porch is considered curtilage, law enforcement may NOT use a drug sniffing dog there without a warrant.
True
Being passenger in an automobile that contains contraband is enough PC for arrest, whether the contraband belongs to you or not.
True
Broad discretion is given to law enforcement in terms of what crimes they may arrest individuals.
True
Congress immediately passed statutory law that made Miranda moot in 1968.
True
Custodial interrogation may occur in non-police station scenarios, such as in a home or on a public sidewalk.
True
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure outline protocols for warrant execution, but also allows that mistakes may be made without Fourth Amendment protections being implemented.
True
Illinois v Caballes tells us that drug-sniffing dogs are NOT considered a search subject to the warrant requirement.
True
In Brewer v Williams, the SCOTUS clarifies whether comments designed to elicit confessions are to be considered interrogations, even when they are not presented in question form.
True
In Florence v Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, the SCOTUS decided that there was no requirement of reasonable suspicion for strip searches in jails, even for those taken in for unpaid fines.
True
In some capacity, "profiling" may be used to establish reasonable suspicion.
True
Interrogations may involve the use of casual conversation and are not considered strictly in question-style format.
True
It is legal to use evidence that would otherwise be subject to the exclusionary rule in grand jury proceedings.
True
Once Miranda rights are invoked, law enforcement should not question a suspect unless the suspect (or attorney) initiate contact.
True
Part of the SCOTUS logic for not incorporating the exclusionary rule in Wolf v CO (1949) was that it is a procedural rule, not constitutional law.
True
Per CA v Hodari, an officer's actions must indicate to a person that he is not free to leave before a "seizure" takes place. Thus, if actions don't indicate seizure, none has taken place- no matter a person's response.
True
Ronald Reagan spoke out specifically about his dislike of the exclusionary rule by telling a story about a diaper.
True
Searches at border crossing can be conducted without a warrant, and may include disassembling an automobile if law enforcement feel it necessary.
True
Silence by a defendant is not sufficient to invoke Miranda rights.
True
States may decide for themselves whether to require a warrant for UAV surveillance by local law enforcement.
True
The SCOTUS considers the right to an attorney in interrogations as a function of Sixth Amendment right to counsel in Escobedo v IL.
True
The SCOTUS recognizes that law enforcement themselves may cause an exigent circumstance, and have made exceptions to the warrant requirement when this happens.
True
The classic definition of a "seizure", according to the SCOTUS, is shaped by whether a reasonable person feels free to leave an encounter with law enforcement.
True
The logic of Miranda is that the "voluntariness" of confessions is completely and procedurally safeguarded.
True
There is no legal justification required for regular law enforcement encounters with public citizens.
True
Wong Sun v US is an example of the "purged taint" exception.
True
Which of the following was a unanimous decision?
US v Jones
Which case established the "good faith" exception to the exclusionary rule?
US v Leon
Which case established the precedent that evidence obtained as a result of an invalid warrant is admissible at trial if the police reasonably believed the warrant to be valid?
US v Leon
Which case created a BRIGHT LINE RULE about automobile searches incident to arrest?
US v Robinson
In which case did SCOTUS establish the False Friend Rule?
US v White
Which of the following is NOT a consideration in determining curtilage?
Visibility
Which case illustrates the "hot pursuit" exception to the warrant requirement?
Warden v Hayden
1. Can Hank (DEA agent) search the RV as he insists without a warrant and with PC only? Yes or No 2. What case tells you this?
Yes CA v Carney
US v Hensley tells us that information found on_______are a source for reasonable suspicion.
a wanted flyer
What is the most difficult kind of source for law enforcement to prove as reliable PC?
anonymous information
Which of the following requires PC for a search without a warrant?
automobile searches
Which of the following is NOT a rationale for the legality of the exclusionary rule?
constitutional law expressly mandates this rule
In Mapp v. Ohio, the U.S. Supreme Court held that _____.
evidence seized in an unlawful search was to be excluded in state courts
In the Wong Sun case, the fact that the second agent had clearly let Wong Sun know his rights before he re-interviewed him is an example of what condition? This is necessary for recognizing purged taint.
intervening events
Which of the following does not require reasonable suspicion to perform a warrantless search?
jails
Brinegar v US (1949) tells us that with PC, we are dealing with _____________.
probabilities
What do the following refer to? specific and articulable facts more than a hunch not a neat set of legal rules case-by-case determination
reasonable suspicion
In which of the following scenarios is testimony collected by non-Mirandized suspects NOT allowed in legal proceedings?
statements collected after Miranda is given that are related to earlier statements before Miranda is given
Which "test" for PC is the most supportive of law enforcement discretion?
totality of circumstances
In Silverthorne Lumber Co. v US (1920), identify the terms used by the Court for: a) the primary evidence b) the secondary evidence
tree fruit
