In Brigham City v. Stuart, the Supreme Court held that police, while not an emergency,
could enter a residence to arrest occupants.
a. True
b. False
The Self-Incrimination Clause has only one, specific goal: to protect against compelled,
self-incriminating statements, and thus falls under the _____ Amendment.
a. Fourteenth
b. Second
c. Fourth
d. Fifth
The _____ Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that “Excessive bail shall not be
required.
a. Fourth
b. Fifth
c. Sixth
d. Eighth
Another term for a no contest plea is a plea of _____.
a. former jeopardy
b. guilty but mentally ill
c. nolo contendere
d. guilty on conditions
The requirement that only voluntary confessions be admitted grows out of the _____
Amendment.
a. Fourth and Sixth
b. Fifth and Fourteenth
c. Sixth and Eighth
d. Eighth and Fourteenth
The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is the _____ privilege that
has been incorporated into the U.S. Constitution and many state constitutions.
a. state
b. qualified
c. primary
d. only
In courts that use the _____ Plus test, the admissibility question frequently turns on how
accurately and faithfully the testing laboratory followed accepted procedure.
a. Frye
b. Daubert
c. Williams
d. Conners
Many jurisdictions have set up special procedures to protect child victims who testify at
the trial of their alleged abuser.
a. True
b. False
The Bruton rule is designed to protect the defendant’s _____.
a. confrontation rights under the Sixth Amendment
b. privilege against self-incrimination
c. right to present a defense
d. right to equal protection
If the improper police conduct is a failure to give a Miranda warning, the courts always
apply the poisonous tree doctrine and suppress evidence obtained.
a. True
b. False
A police officer can never be an expert witness.
a. True
b. False
The majority of documents and writings introduced for use as evidence in criminal
trials are proven authentic and genuine by _____ evidence or by the contents of the
document or writing itself.
a. circumstantial
b. real
c. direct
d. presumptive
The Frye test was criticized for being both too broad and too narrow.
a. True
b. False
When originally ratified, the Bill of Rights limited the powers of the federal
government, but not the powers of the states.
a. True
b. False
If drugs are thrown away and the police have exhibited proper conduct in causing the
abandonment, the drugs can be used as evidence.
a. True
b. False
A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act.
a. True
b. False
The Brady rule requires that the defense disclose clearly exculpatory evidence to the
prosecution.
a. True
b. False
Which of the following is not required under Miranda before confessions are
admissible?
a. Proper warnings must be given.
b. The suspect must understand the warnings.
c. A voluntary waiver must be obtained.
d. An attorney must be present during warnings and waiver.
The pedophile exception to Rule 404 requires only that the two offenses involved
similar sexual conduct, and that in both cases the defendant had a family or intimate
friend. relationship with the victim.
a. True
b. False
Sham roadblocks have been held to be _____.
a. a violation of the Fourth Amendment
b. a violation of the Fifth Amendment
c. a violation of the Sixth Amendment
d. constitutional
Case 8.1
Police respond to the scene of fight inside a local bar. The scene is chaotic with
ambulance personnel attending to an unconscious male. In the course of rendering aid
to the victim, the victim and the victim’s clothing were removed from the scene. The
victim’s clothing and personal effects are collected by an emergency room nurse at the
hospital.
Police interview witnesses who report that the victim, Jeff Anderson, got into an
argument with another bar patron/accused for having several rounds of drinks put on
the patrons tab. Witnesses also report that the patron/accused struck Mr. Anderson with
a close fist and two then exchanged several punches with Mr. Anderson giving the
patron/accused a bloody nose. The patron/accused then struck Mr. Anderson with a
chair knocking him unconscious and fled the bar.
Police interview the bar owner who reports that accused became enraged after getting
the $500.00 credit card receipt for his drink tab. The bar owner stated the “guy flipped
out, nearly jumping over the bar when he saw the amount of his tab”. The bar owner
reported that he pointed Mr. Anderson and said “go talk to your friend – he ordered
three rounds for the bar on your tab.” Police ask for and receive copies of the credit card
receipts for the accused, Dick Grayson. The investigating officer responds to the
hospital and takes a statement from the victim who reports not knowing why he was
attacked. While at the hospital the investigating officer asks if anyone had sought
treatment for facial injuries from a fight. It is determined that Mr. Grayson had been
seen and had reported to the registration nurse that his injuries were from ‘some guy
sucker punching” him in a bar and had also stated “you should see the other guy.” Mr.
Grayson is taken into custody and is being escorted out of the emergency room when he
stops in front of room where the victim lying in a hospital bed being attended to by
medical personnel he blurts out “I’m in so much trouble” and asks the officers “is he
going to make it.” Mr. Grayson charged with aggravated assault.
Would the emergency room nurse’s testimony regarding Mr. Grayson’s statement to her
about he got injured in a bar fight fall under any hearsay exceptions?
a. Yes, because it was an excited utterance.
b. Yes, because there was no expectation of confidentiality
c. No, because it requires the fact finder to draw inferences
d. No, because of the physician-patient privilege
The Fifth Amendment protects only a person’s personal writings, not their business
writings or documents.
a. True
b. False
Evidence of flight from the scene of a crime is _____.
a. sufficient by itself to establish guilt
b. never admissible
c. direct evidence of guilt
d. never sufficient by itself to establish guilt
The primary justification for the exclusionary rule is _____.
a. discouraging or deterring police misconduct
b. ensuring judicial discretion
c. helping innocent defendants avoid conviction
d. helping guilty defendants avoid conviction
Courts have upheld statutes requiring mandatory DNA samples from persons arrested or
indicted for ______ crimes.
a. misdemeanor
b. felony
c. heinous
d. administrative
Case 4.2
An undercover security officer at chain supermarket located in New Jersey watches a
suspicious male circling the liquor aisles with an empty shopping cart. The man waits
for other patrons to leave the area and places four bottles of vodka inside his jacket. He
then moves toward the exit. As he does so, he observes security at the door. He then
picks up a bag of potatoes and proceeds to the cashier lanes. He pays for the potatoes
and attempts to leave the store where he is stopped by security. Security confronts the
man about the shoplifting and he begins to cause a scene. Police arrive on scene and the
security officer advises them that the suspect had been observed concealing four bottles
of vodka inside his jacket and was leaving the store without paying for them. The
suspect responds by saying that he simply forgot about the vodka in his jacket. He
produces the four bottles from his jacket. The security officer advises police that the
entire event was captured on their surveillance systems. The officers ask the suspect for
identification and he presents an out of state driver’s license which appears to the
officers to be altered. The police arrest the suspect and take possession of identification
and the four bottles of vodka. The suspect, who has identified himself as Mark Smith,
shouts that the arrest is unlawful. The security officer goes to the police station to
provide a statement and a copy of the surveillance video. Once at headquarters, the
police are able to confirm that the identification was fraudulent and the suspect’s true
identity was David Gray and that Mr. Gray had numerous outstanding warrants for
similar charges throughout the state. While inventorying Mr. Gray’s personal property, it
was determined that he had only twenty dollars in cash and no credit cards, thereby
having no means to have paid for the vodka, valued at eighty dollars a bottle.
Additionally the suspect’s jacket had several concealed interior pockets sewn into the
lining.
In this case what type of evidence would the security officer’s testimony be considered?
a. circumstantial
b. direct
c. exculpatory
d. indirect
The admission of hearsay testimony may sometimes violate the _____ Amendment.
a. Fourth
b. Fifth
c. Sixth
d. Eighth
The Confrontation Clause requires that states create exceptions to the hearsay rule.
a. True
b. False
In an adversary system of justice, each side generally conducts separate investigations
and generally does not share advance information with the other side.
a. True
b. False
Case 7.2
Brenda Lee is found murdered on the rear porch of her sorority house after having a
heated argument with her boyfriend, Britt Reid, earlier in the evening. The women in
the sorority house claim not to have any knowledge of the murder. The medical
examiner conducts an autopsy and forensic testing reveals DNA evidence and blood
other than the victim’s on her clothing. Joe Carbone, a member of a fraternity two
houses away, comes forward two days later and provides a statement that one of the
sorority sisters, Shirley Temple, told Joe that she saw Britt Reid kill the victim. Bernie
is ultimately charged with the murder of Brenda Lee.
At the murder trial, Joe is a witness testifying for the State. As the State’s first witness,
Joe testifies that Shirley told him that she saw the defendant kill the victim of the case.
Joe’s statement is being offered to show that the defendant killed the victim. Is this
hearsay? Shirley is not testifying at trial.
a. Yes, because Shirley is not available to allow the accuracy of Joe’s statement to be
tested.
b. Yes, because the testimony violates the Confrontation Clause of the First amendment.
c. No, because it requires the fact finder to draw inferences as to the defendants’ intent.
d. No, because it is based on Joe’s own actions and observations and Joe is available for
cross-examination.
In general, hearsay evidence is not admissible.
a. True
b. False
Case 11.1
Janet is a successful Colorado entrepreneur and has recently decided to open a
recreational marijuana sales business in Denver, “High and Mighty.” The state and
county require operators of such businesses to acquire a license, hold a public meeting
coordinated with the local and state license board, and other special procedures for this
new and highly regulated enterprise. One holiday weekend, Detective Jones stops in
and informs Janet that he is conducting a surprise inspection of the business to
determine if Janet is complying with state record-keeping laws and other rules ensuring
that minors are not being permitted to purchase the recreational marijuana. Janet has
never been the subject of such a search and is concerned the detective’s presence will
scare away customers. There are 20 customers in line, waiting to purchase recreational
marijuana. Detective Jones enters the store over Janet’s objection and despite her
request that he produce a search warrant. He enters her office and reviews her
paperwork relevant to state record-keeping laws. He notes several irregularities and
documents them. When Detective Jones returns to the sales area, he finds that Janet and
her staff have continued to serve customers while he was in the office. Detective Jones
checks the ID of several people who have made purchases and finds that two of them
are under age under state law to purchase marijuana. While Detective Jones is checking
IDs, one of the patrons (Bobby) waiting to buy marijuana says, “Man, I can”t believe
this guy is giving us such a hard time. What a bummer!” Detective Jones directs this
man to empty his pockets on a nearby table and finds he has cocaine. Detective Jones
arrests Bobby for possession of cocaine, cites Janet for violating state law for poor
record-keeping and charges her with providing marijuana to underage patrons.
Did the search of Janet’s business records meet the three requirements for authorizing
inspections without search warrants of closely regulated businesses as established by
the U.S. Supreme Court in New York v Burger?
a. Yes, there was a ‘substantial” government interest and Detective Jones’ inspection was
necessary to further the Colorado “regulatory scheme.”
b. No, business records are not covered under such a search, just marijuana.
c. No, the search did not advance the government interest embodied in the law.
d. Yes, the Sixth Amendment does not apply to a commercial enterprise only personal
residences.
Case 11.3
Jack has been released from confinement early and placed on probation. He found a job
and rented an apartment in his hometown. One day, he responded to a knock on the
door and sees his probation officer, Stephanie Stone. She tells him that she has decided
to conduct a surprise inspection of his home. Jack insists that he has been a very good
citizen and is no longer involved in any criminal behavior. Stephanie has no evidence
that this is not true, but insists on conducting a complete search of the home anyway.
Stephanie finds nothing out of the ordinary, but asks if Jack will follow her to the office
for a drug test, just in case. Jack says, “Sure, I have nothing to hide.” Unfortunately for
Jack, the drug test is positive for an illegal substance and his parole is revoked.
Was Parole Officer Stone’s search of Jack’s apartment lawful?
a. No, just because someone has been convicted of a crime does not mean that they lose
protections under the Fourth Amendment.
b. No, as this would violate Jack’s Fifth Amendment rights.
c. Yes, Jack has a diminished expectation of privacy as a parolee.
d. Yes, Jack loses all rights under the Constitution as a parolee.