If the police can show that the evidence was discovered by two methods, one of which
was lawful, it may trigger the _____ exception to the exclusionary rule.
a. exigent circumstances
b. inevitable discovery
c. independent source
d. attenuation of the taint
Under American law, criminal defendants have a right to a perfect (error free) trial.
a. True
b. False
Case 7.3
Police respond to the scene of an apparent arson incident which involved a vacant
commercial office building. The fire was discovered at 3:30 a.m. by a passing patrol
unit, shortly after it had started. The initial officers on scene found all exterior doors
locked and made forced entry to check for potential victims.
Fire officials report signs and evidence of accelerants near each stairwell. An empty
kerosene can was found outside the structure, in the bushes by the property line. A
premises history reveals that the property has been vacant for almost a year and has
been for sale twice as long. Town records show several denied zoning and building
adjustment applications over the past two years. There are numerous property
maintenance violations for the property as well.
Detectives following up on the case find the property owner Slim Shady uncooperative
and claiming he knows nothing about the fire. He states that he was at home the entire
night, hanging with his partner Rico Tubbs. Background investigations reveal that Mr.
Shady also operates Shady Flooring and Paint. He owns a working van with the
markings “Shady Flooring and Paint”. Detectives also discover that Mr. Shady
increased his insurance of the incident property six months prior to the fire.
Detectives interview Slim Shady’s neighbor who reports seeing Mr. Tubbs vehicle in the
driveway. He also reports hearing a vehicle pull into the driveway and two males
arguing about a can. The neighbor recognized the voice of Mr. Shady and states that Mr.
Shady was yelling at the other male for leaving a can behind. According to the
neighbor, the other male said that he threw it into the bushes with all the other garbage.
Detectives question Mr. Tubbs, who initially states that he and Mr. Shady were hanging
out at Mr. Shady’s house all night. Detectives re-interview Mr. Tubbs several days later
and tell him that they can place Mr. Shady, his work van, and another person going to
and from the scene; and that they have retrieved surveillance video from several stores
adjacent to the crime scene. Mr. Tubbs then changes his story, claiming that he just took
a ride with Mr. Shady, who had told him that he left some flooring supplies in the
building. He claims he was unaware of Mr. Shady’s intentions or actions until after he
ran out of the building and threw an empty can of kerosene at Mr. Tubbs. Mr. Tubbs
further states “Slim threatened to mess me up because I was already on parole”.
Ultimately, Mr. Shady and Mr. Tubbs are charged with the arson.
At trail, could the detective testify to the neighbor’s out of court statement regarding
hearing Mr. Shady yelling about the other person leaving a can behind if the neighbor
were not available at trial as he is out of the country?
a. Yes, because the testimony was not offered as evidence of the truth of the matter
asserted.
b. Yes, because the testimony does not violate the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth
Amendment.
c. No, because it requires the fact finder to draw inferences as to the defendants’ intent.
d. No, because the defense cannot cross-examine the neighbor who made the statement.
Case 17.1
Shelbyville city police heard rumors that Jack and his brother John were involved in
illegal sports betting. To avoid the police, the brothers supposedly moved from location
to location and operated an active betting office with several employees, generally from
hotel rooms. The police received a call from a disgruntled bettor that the mobile betting
parlor would be set up next Wednesday. The cooperative bettor agreed to allow police
officers to install hidden microphones and video cameras in his home, and promised to
offer Jack and John the use his of home in exchange for a break on his gambling debt.
John also had a legitimate job at a local carwash and the surveillance technicians snuck
into the carwash to plant an additional microphone in his private office to try and
confirm details of the betting operation. As it turned out, John did not talk about his
gambling job at the carwash, though several of the other employees did use his office
when he was out to talk about how they were embezzling money from the business. As
it turned out, Jack and John did set up the gambling parlor at the house. Over the next
several days, Jack and John conducted illegal betting operations that were recorded both
with the microphone and with the video camera. Both men were arrested for violation
of state law, which prohibited such gambling operations. Julie and Deborah were also
arrested for embezzlement at the carwash the same day based on their incriminating
statements in John’s office. Additionally, the industrious surveillance technicians also
filmed Maggie entering and leaving the house in which the gambling parlor had been
set up from their surveillance van in the street. She was arrested for illegal gambling.
Jack and John feel a special confidential relationship with their clients and have
demanded these recordings be thrown out as violations of their constitutional rights.
The videotape and microphone recordings made at the house are:
a. inadmissible since the Shelbyville police neglected to secure a warrant.
b. admissible because the brothers should have been more careful.
c. inadmissible as the gambling activity did not occur in public view.
d. admissible and the brothers have no standing to object.
An arrest warrant confers a limited authority to enter the dwelling in which the suspect
resides when there is reason to believe the suspect is inside.
a. True
b. False
The U.S. Supreme Court set a much ______ standard for obtaining a fire, health, or
housing inspection search warrant
a. higher
b. more subjective
c. lower
d. more objective
Eyewitness identification is less reliable if the witness is of a different race than the
suspect.
a. True
b. False
A full confession about the crime would be an example of direct evidence.
a. True
b. False
The expectation of privacy in a hotel room can terminate, as when the hotel check-out
time passes without extension.
a. True
b. False
At the _____, the defendant will enter a formal plea to the charges.
a. arraignment
b. pretrial motions
c. preliminary hearing
d. coram nobis
The Fourth Amendment does not apply if police are lawfully in a place and see a
document in _____ view.
a. surreptitious or secret
b. covert or concealed
c. occluded or precluded
d. plain or public
The burden of proof is actually two burdens: the burden of _____ and the burden of
_____.
a. rationality; inference
b. production; persuasion
c. preponderance; clarity
d. probability; opportunity
Case 1.2
It is 1166 A.D. and English Lord William Smith has been accused of crimes against the
Crown by Lord Richard Mason. He has been brought before the King to answer and be
judged for his alleged crimes. If found guilty of the alleged crimes, he will most likely
be put to death.
What 1215 legal document would have provided Lord Smith additional legal
protections?
a. The Bill of Rights
b. The Code of Hammurabi
c. The British Constitution
d. The Magna Carta
Case 1.1
Bob is pulled over for a motor vehicle violation. During the course of the motor vehicle
stop the officer determines that Bob had been drinking. He is arrested for DWI.
Secondary to the arrest, the officer searches Bob and finds a significant amount heroin
on Bob’s person. Bob is additionally charged with possession and distribution of heroin.
In the above scenario, which constitutional amendment covers the recovery of heroin
found on Bob as a result of his arrest for DWI?
a. the section of the Sixth Amendment, that provides that “the accused shall enjoy the
right to a speedy and public trial”
b. the section of the Sixth Amendment that provides that persons charged with a state or
federal crime have the right to counsel
c. the Fourth Amendment, that forbids unreasonable searches and seizures by officers of
the federal and state governments
d. the Fifth Amendment, that specifies the right of the defendant to remain silent
The 1925 case of Carroll v. U.S. dealt with the _____ exception.
a. movable vehicle
b. special needs
c. emergency
d. exigent
Case 15.2
Officer McElroy suspects that Leon is selling drugs. One day he follows Leon to a park
and notices that he meets with another man and passes him a newspaper. Unfortunately,
Officer McElroy is unable to approach the young men without being seen because of
the open area and both men quickly disappear into the trees. Since Officer McElroy
does not think he was seen, he returns to the park, but hides behind some trees and uses
his binoculars to observe another meeting between Leon and another young man. He is
able to adjust his binoculars to see that Leon places a baggie of marijuana inside the
newspaper immediately before the meeting. The other young man hands Leon paper
money and receives the rolled up newspaper from Leon. Officer McElroy sneaks up on
the two young men and overhears the buyer say, “I hope this weed is better than the last
stuff you sold me.” Officer McElroy steps out from behind a tree and arrests both men.
Leon challenges the use of binoculars as an invasion of his privacy. What is likely to
occur next?
a. Leon will not succeed because the illegal transaction occurred in plain view of the
police officer.
b. The arrest is invalid since, without the binoculars, Officer McElroy would not have
seen sufficient evidence of the crime to justify the arrest.
c. Surveillance of this type will require a court order.
d. Officer McElroy will need to show he did not have sufficient time to secure a court
order to use the binoculars.
Rape shield statutes can prevent the introduction of circumstantial evidence about the
victim.
a. True
b. False
One relatively recent set of exceptions to the hearsay rule has been created for _____.
a. co-conspirators
b. statements to physicians
c. regularly kept records
d. child victims of sexual abuse
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.
At trial, the defendant argued that the arrest was unlawful as he never left the store with
the bottles of vodka. He claimed he had merely forgotten that he had the bottles and had
intended to pay for them. What evidence might be used to infer his intent to steal the
vodka?
a. his immediate claim that the arrest was not lawful
b. his until the liquor aisle was empty to put the vodka inside his jacket
c. his use of a false identity
d. his noticing the presence of security at the exit door
Scientific evidence is infallible.
a. True
b. False
The privilege against self-incrimination gives the defendant a right to testify at his or
her trial.
a. True
b. False
A defense witness states that he heard a person other than the defendant admit to the
crime. This statement could be admissible under the exception for statements against
penal interest.
a. True
b. False
Knock-and talk sessions can become “_____”, if the questioning changes from
consensual to interrogation, and may result in constitutional violations.
a. voluntary
b. derogatory
c. custodial
d. situational
Any statement or conduct from which guilt of the crime can be inferred is called a/an
_____ statement.
a. perjured
b. confessiorial
c. incriminating
d. allocutional
It is relatively easy for fingerprint experts to determine the age of a latent print.
a. True
b. False
An indictment is a formal charging document issued by a grand jury.
a. True
b. False
In terms of procedure, _____.
a. felony cases involve more steps than misdemeanor cases
b. misdemeanor cases involve more protections for defendants
c. felony and misdemeanor cases have exactly the same procedures
d. most states require grand jury review only in misdemeanor cases
Private citizens who are acting totally on their own and interrogating suspects do not
have to give Miranda warnings.
a. True
b. False
Case 13.1
Officer Mendelson responds to a robbery call at a local music store. On arrival, the
store owner and five witnesses say a young man grabbed an arm full of classical records
and just ran down the street. Mendelson runs out of the store and sees a young man
disappear around the corner. He catches up with him and tackles him to the ground.
Mendelson had seen classical records on the ground earlier, but did not see the young
man holding or dropping these records. There were no other people on the street at the
time, except an older woman with a cane. The police officer decides it is too much of a
hassle to bring the young man down to the station for a formal lineup and decides to
bring him back to the store to see if anyone can recognize him. Sure enough, the owner
identifies him as the robber, as do the other five witnesses, one after another. Mendelson
arrests the man and he is promptly charged with robbery.
At trial, the shop owner takes the stand and is asked whether the person sitting next to
the defense attorney is the same young man who robbed his music store.
a. This question eliminates any possible constitutional violation of an improper showup
by Mendelson.
b. The question is unduly suggestive and renders the courtroom identification
inadmissible.
c. The prosecutor can also ask if the witness had identified the defendant as the robber
before trial.
d. The witness cannot be cross examined about this identification by the defense.
Rule _____ has already resulted in changes in how scientific evidence is received.
a. 100
b. 169
c. 609
d. 702
Case 10.2
Police respond to a 911 call from a female caller reporting a domestic violence incident.
The victim/caller meets the responding officers at the door and invites them inside her
home. Once inside, the officers observe evidence of a physical altercation with broken
furniture. The victim reports that her boyfriend, with whom she lives, left after
slamming her into the wall and threatening to kill her. The victim reports that every
time her boyfriend gets wasted, he gets violent. She then tells the police that he left his
bag of drugs on their bed and she wants them and her boy friend out of the house. The
victim leads the police to bedroom and points to clear plastic with what appears to
contain methamphetamine. Police seize the drugs. The victim requests and receives a
temporary restraining order against the boyfriend. The boyfriend is subsequently
arrested and charged with assault and terroristic threats along with possession of
methamphetamine.
Suppose that, upon arrival, police were met at the door by the defendant who refused
entry, but a female could be heard crying within the house. The officers enter the home
to ensure the safety of the victim, and once inside, observe evidence of a crime. Under
what doctrine could the warrantless search and seizure be upheld?
a. curtilage
b. inevitable discovery
c. plain view
d. abandoned property
The trial of _____ in 1603 prompted concern about the use of hearsay in English trials.
a. Sir Walter Raleigh
b. Benjamin Franklin
c. Robert Bruce
d. Oliver Cromwell
The Fourth Amendment applies to searches conducted by private persons acting without
any government involvement.
a. True
b. False
Describe and discuss three examples of special needs searches. Be sure to provide
examples.
A(n) ____________________ search warrant is one that will be executed at some
specified future date.
The field of ____________________ involves the study of blood.
Hearsay rules have been relaxed for children for several purposes. Discuss the factors
that relate to the reliability of children’s statements. Do you believe there are victims,
besides the children, because of the exceptions in child abuse cases? Why or why not?
What might be the pitfalls of this exception? (LO6, 205-206)
Most state statutes require only that the person seeking a civil commitment have a
_____ the person to be committed is potentially dangerous.
The “attenuation” doctrine requires a showing that the time between the improper police
conduct and the subsequently discovered evidence was sufficiently lengthy to dissipate
the “taint” of the illegal conduct. What do you feel is a sufficient length of time for this
to be appropriate? Do you believe that there should be a universal time period that
would apply to all situations? Why or why not?
________should be used whenever practical and must be used in situations where
show- ups would not be authorized.
Discuss the issue of forensic analysts’ reports and expert opinions in relation to
testimony being admissible by analysts who did not actually conduct the laboratory
analysis themselves. What do you see as possible issues with this being permitted?
There are a number of agencies or sources providing the collecting, correlating, and
coordination of evidence. Name and discuss at least three of these.
The Federal Rules of Evidence that deals with the admissibility of scientific evidence is
Rule ____________________.
The following types of circumstantial evidence may be used to show that documents are
authentic and genuine.
To what extent do parolees and prisoners have expectations of privacy protected by the
Fourth Amendment?
Discuss the legal precedent of the case of U.S. v. Leon.
The Fourth Amendment requires that warrants be based on ____________________.
Under what circumstances may a confession be deemed unconstitutional? Discuss each
one in detail.
What is the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine? Why do you think it is necessary to
have such a rule?
To have _____ to challenge a police search, the person must have had a reasonable
expectation of privacy in the place searched.
Search and seizure protections are found in the ____________________ Amendment.