Chapter 5: Exam
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
1. In 1761, ___________ reviled the _______________ as “the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the
most destructive of English liberty and the fundamental principles of law, that was ever found in
an English law book.”
a. John Adams; writ of habeas corpus
b. John Hancock; Stamp Act
c. James Monroe; general warrant
d. James Otis; Writs of Assistance
2. In Olmstead v. United States (1928), the Supreme court took a __________ view of the scope of the
Fourth Amendment.
a. liberal
b. strict
c. noninterpretivist
d. libertarian
3. According to Justice Harlan’s concurrence in Katz v. United States (1967), the protections of the Fourth
Amendment extend to any place or thing in which an individual has a
a. specific property interest.
b. reasonable expectation of privacy.
c. subjective desire to remain private.
d. None of the above.
4. In Carroll v. United States (1925), the Supreme Court upheld the warrantless search of an automobile
believed to be carrying
a. a bomb.
b. counterfeit currency.
c. firearms.
d. bootleg liquor.
5. In Tennessee v. Garner (1985), the Supreme Court held that a police officer may use ____________
only when necessary to apprehend a fleeing felon and only when “the officer has probable cause
to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or physical injury to the officer or
others.”
a. a choke hold
b. a stun gun
c. deadly force
d. None of the above is true.
6. It was not until Mapp v. Ohio (1961) that the Supreme Court extended the Fourth Amendment
__________ to state criminal prosecutions by way of the Fourteenth Amendment.
a. exclusionary rule
b. probable cause requirement
c. particularity requirement
d. warrant clause
7. Until recently, most federal courts followed the ________ test in determining whether appointed
counsel was ineffective at trial.
a. mockery of justice
b. harmless error
c. reasonable doubt
d. preponderance of evidence
8. In Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart (1976), the Supreme Court invalidated a ___________
imposed by a trial judge to safeguard the rights of a man accused of a brutal mass murder.
a. change of venue
b. secret trial
c. pretrial release order
d. gag order
9. In Robinson v. California (1962), the Supreme Court held that state courts were bound by the Eighth
Amendment prohibition against
a. cruel and unusual punishments.
b. excessive bail.
c. excessive fines.
d. compulsory self-incrimination.
10. In Ford v. Wainwright (1985), the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the
execution of a prisoner who is
a. legally insane.
b. mentally retarded.
c. under 16 years old.
d. None of the above is true.
11. The Warren Court’s decision to expand federal _____________ helped fuel the “criminal justice
revolution” of the 1960s.
a. law enforcement authority
b. pretrial detention
c. aid to the cities
d. habeas corpus jurisdiction
12. In Stone v. Powell (1976), the Supreme Court decided that state prisoners could not use federal habeas
corpus petitions to raise any ______________ issues as long as they had been provided “a full
and fair opportunity” to litigate those issues in the state courts.
a. cruel and unusual punishment
b. self-incrimination
c. Fourth Amendment
d. federal constitutional
13. In Schall v. Martin (1984), the Supreme Court upheld a ____________ program for juveniles.
a. work release
b. probation and parole
c. community service
d. pretrial detention
14. In Illinois v. Gates (1983), the Supreme Court abandoned the rigorous Aguilar-Spinelli test in favor of
a _______________ test that made it easier for police officers to get search warrants.
a. reasonable person
b. reasonable suspicion
c. good-faith
d. totality of circumstances
15. The Supreme Court has held repeatedly that, under ________________, a warrantless search may be
“reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment.
a. the “good–faith” exception
b. exigent circumstances
c. the doctrine of stare decisis
d. the totality of circumstances test
16. In ___________________, the Supreme Court first suggested that evidence obtained in violation of
the Fourth Amendment should be excluded from trial.
a. Boyd v. United States (1886)
b. Carroll v. United States (1925)
c. Bram v. United States (1897)
d. Weems v. United States (1910)
17. In Trop v. Dulles (1958), Chief Justice Warren said that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of
the Eighth Amendment must draw its meaning from
a. the intentions of the Framers of the Bill of Rights.
b. historical practice.
c. the common law.
d. evolving standards of decency.
18. Under the doctrine of ___________________, the state assumes ultimate responsibility for caring for
children, mentally retarded persons, and persons who are insane.
a. in loco parentis
b. obiter dicta
c. sovereign immunity
d. parens patriae
19. In McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971), the Supreme Court refused to extend the right to
_____________ to juvenile proceedings.
a. counsel
b. trial by jury
c. appeal
d. a speedy and public trial
20. Writing for the Supreme Court in Schall v. Martin (1984), Justice _________ stressed that “the
Constitution does not mandate elimination of all differences in the treatment of juveniles.”
a. Stewart
b. O’Connor
c. Stevens
d. Rehnquist
21. The judicial extension of the Fourth Amendment and other protections of the Bill of Rights to limit
the actions of the state and local governments is referred to as the doctrine of ___________.
a. res judicata
b. incorporation
c. extension
d. absorption
22. Adhering to Justice John M. Harlan’s concurrence in ______________ (1967), the Supreme Court has
since held that the Fourth Amendment extends to any place or any thing in which an individual
has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
a. Katz v. United States
b. Melton v. United States
c. United States v. Calandra
d. United States v. Davies
23. In Carroll v. United States (1925), the Supreme Court upheld the warrantless search of a (an)
____________ believed to be harboring illegal liquor.
a. automobile
b. suitcase
c. office building
d. None of the above is true.
24. Under Wolf v. Colorado, states were free to adopt or ignore the Weeks exclusionary rule. Some
adopted the rule; most did not. The discrepancy between the rules applicable to state and federal
courts gave rise to the ______ doctrine.
a. fruit of the poisonous tree
b. totality of circumstances
c. total incorporation
d. silver platter
25. In Olmstead v. United States (1928), Chief Justice _________________ stated, “The reasonable view
is that one who installs in his house a telephone instrument with connecting wires intends to
project his voice to those quite outside, and that the wires beyond his house, and messages
passing over them, are not within the protection of the Fourth Amendment.”
a. William Howard Taft
b. Harlan F. Stone
c. Charles Evans Hughes
d. None of the above is true.
26. In ___________________, the Supreme Court reversed a conviction in which government agents,
acting without a warrant, attached a “bug,” or listening device, to the outside of a public
telephone booth from which a suspected bookie often placed calls.
a. Oliver v. United States (1984)
b. Katz v. United States (1967)
c. Kyllo v. United States (2001)
d. None of the above is true.
27. The fundamental requirement imposed by the ______ Amendment is that searches and seizures must
be “reasonable.”
a. Third
b. Fourth
c. Fifth
d. Sixth
28. According to the Supreme Court’s decision in ______________, officers have probable cause when
“the facts and circumstances within their knowledge, and of which they had reasonably
trustworthy information, [are] sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in
the belief that an offense has been or is being committed.”
a. Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971)
b. Illinois v. Gates (1983)
c. Stanford v. Texas (1965)
d. Brinegar v. United States (1949)
29. The Warren Court adopted the ___________test in determining whether to issue search warrants
involving the use of confidential or anonymous informants, whereas the Burger Court adopted the
______________ test.
a. Aguilar-Spinelli; congruence and proportionality
b. congruence and proportionality; Aguilar-Spinelli
106 Chapter 5: The Constitution and Criminal Justice
c. Aguilar-Spinelli; totality of circumstance
d. totality of circumstance; Aguilar-Spinelli
30. Under federal law an officer is required to _______________ upon arrival at the place to be searched
pursuant to a search warrant.
a. knock and announce
b. obtain permission
c. barge in without announcement
d. None of the above is true.
31. In _______________, the Court decided unanimously that the Fourth Amendment requires police,
absent a threat of physical violence or other exigent circumstances, to knock and announce when
serving a search warrant at a home.
a. Richards v. Wisconsin (1997)
b. Wilson v. Arkansas (1995)
c. Hudson v. Michigan (2006)
d. Chimel v. California (1969)
32. In Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973), the Supreme Court _________ a search based on consent even
though the police failed to advise the individual that he was not obligated to consent to the police
request.
a. upheld
b. invalidated
c. denied certiorari
d. None of the above is true.
33. In ______________, the Court held that police are not required to inform motorists who are stopped
for other reasons that they are “free to go” before asking them to consent to a search of their
automobile.
a. Chimel v. California (1969)
b. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973)
c. Florida v. Bostick (1991)
d. Ohio v. Robinette (1996)
34. In ______________, the Supreme Court placed limits on a search incident to arrest of an occupant of
a vehicle by holding that “police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest only
Chapter 5: The Constitution and Criminal Justice 107
if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search
or it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest.”
a. United States v. Ross (1982)
b. California v. Acevedo (1991)
c. Arizona v. Gant (2009)
d. Arkansas v. Sanders (1991)
35. An accepted justification for warrantless searches includes ______________.
a. plain view
b. evanescent evidence
c. hot pursuit
d. All of the above are true.
36. The stop and frisk investigatory detention was upheld by the Supreme Court in
a. Warden v. Hayden (1967).
b. Terry v. Ohio (1968).
c. Michigan v. Tyler (1978).
d. None of the above is true.
37. In ___________, the Supreme Court said that the exclusionary rule is not applicable to a situation in
which contraband is seized from a person who was falsely arrested due to police negligence.
a. Herring v. United States (2009)
b. Wilson v. Arkansas (1995)
c. Hudson v. Michigan (2006)
d. Malley v. Briggs (1986)
38. In County of Riverside v. McLaughlin (1991), the Rehnquist Court held that an individual could be
detained for as long as ________ hours prior to a probable cause hearing without necessarily
violating the Fourth Amendment.
a. 12
b. 24
c. 48
d. 60
39. In ________________, the Supreme Court held that police officers may use deadly force only when
necessary to apprehend a fleeing felon and only when “the officer has probable cause to believe
108 Chapter 5: The Constitution and Criminal Justice
that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or physical injury to the officer or others.”
a. Bram v. United States (1987)
b. Ashcraft v. Tennessee (1944)
c. Lyons v. Oklahoma (1944)
d. Tennessee v. Garner (1985)
40. Writing for the Court in Katz v. United States which Justice famously stated that “the Fourth
Amendment protects people—not places”?
a. William Brennan
b. Byron White
c. Potter Stewart
d. John Marshall Harlan
41. In_________________, the Court prohibited the use of GPS tracking devices placed on suspects’ cars
without prior judicial authorization.
a. United States v. Jones (2012)
b. Kyllo v. United States (2001)
c. Illinois v. Gates (1983)
d. Oliver v. United States (1984)
42. In___________, the Supreme Court invalidated a warrant that was issued by the state’s attorney
general, a law enforcement officer, rather than by a judge or magistrate.
a. Stanford v. Texas (1965)
b. Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971)
c. Brinegar v. United States (1949)
d. Illinois v. Gates (1983)
43. In___________, the Supreme Court reaffirmed this longstanding distaste for “dragnet” searches when
it invalidated a five-hour search of a Communist Party headquarters resulting in the seizure of some 5,000
items.
a. Stanford v. Texas (1965)
b. Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971)
c. Brinegar v. United States (1949)
d. Illinois v. Gates (1983)
44. According to the Court’s decision in____________, officers have probable cause when “the facts and
circumstances within their knowledge, and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information, [are]
sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been or is
being committed.”
a. Stanford v. Texas (1965)
b. Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971)
c. Brinegar v. United States (1949)
d. Illinois v. Gates (1983)
45. In__________, the Court ruled unanimously that states may not create a blanket “drug exception” to
the requirement that police officers knock and announce prior to executing a search warrant.
a. Alabama v. White (1990)
b. Wilson v. Arkansas (1995)
c. Richards v. Wisconsin (1997)
d. Hudson v. Michigan (2006)
46. In____________, the Supreme Court upheld the controversial police practice of boarding interstate
buses in big-city terminals, approaching persons matching a drug courier profile, and asking them for
permission to search their belongings.
a. United States v. Matlock (1974)
b. Florida v. Bostick (1991)
c. Ohio v. Robinette (1996)
d. Georgia v. Randolph (2006)
47. In____________, the Supreme Court held that police without a warrant may not search a home when
the occupants disagree as to whether consent should be given.
a. United States v. Matlock (1974)
b. Florida v. Bostick (1991)
c. Ohio v. Robinette (1996)
d. Georgia v. Randolph (2006)
48. The Supreme Court has NOT said which of these accepted justifications for warrantless searches are
constitutionally valid.
a. Plain view
b. Hot pursuit
c. Emergency searches
d. None of the above is true.
110 Chapter 5: The Constitution and Criminal Justice
ESSAY QUESTIONS
1. Citing particular cases and doctrinal developments, explain how the Supreme Court has moved
away from a rigid application of the Miranda warnings.
2. What particular constitutional arguments have been invoked against the death penalty? How has
the Supreme Court responded to these objections? Be sure to cite specific cases.
3. Discuss the origin, development and devolution of federal habeas corpus review of state criminal
cases.
4. Describe the strongest arguments for and against the exclusionary rule. What constitutional
claims are consistent with the Rule? What are the practical arguments made against it? Finally,
state which argument you find most convincing.
5. Briefly restate the three rationales that the U.S. Supreme Court originally advanced in support of
the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule. Which of these rationales does the contemporary
Supreme Court continue to recognize? Discuss the erosion of the Fourth Amendment
exclusionary rule since the 1970s. Specifically indicate the principal ways in which the Court has
limited the rule’s application. What factors appear to have contributed most significantly to the
Court’s narrowing and relaxation of the rule? What does the erosion of the exclusionary rule
suggest about the process of constitutional decision making?
6. Citing the relevant case precedents, describe the major justifications for warrantless searches that
the Supreme Court has sanctioned over the years. Is there a general rule that the Court has
articulated involving warrantless searches or does the Court consider each case individually?
7. Describe the importance of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Tennessee v. Garner (1985). How does
this ruling impact law enforcement when attempting to detain wanted criminals? Do you think the
Court made the correct ruling in this case? Why or why not?
8. Citing seminal cases trace the Supreme Court’s development of the Sixth Amendment’s
guarantee of the right to council. How has the Court expanded this right over the years and what
is the Court’s stance on the right to council today?