Get ahead with a $300 test prep scholarship
| Enter to win by Tuesday 9/24
Part 2 Ch. 5-8
Terms in this set (118)
According to the Supreme Court opinion in Tennessee v. Garner, involving the use of deadly force to apprehend a fleeing burglary suspect, deadly force
is a fourth amendment seizure
The case of Payton v. New York (1980) dealt with the authority of police to make arrests at a suspect's home. The United States Supreme Court held that a police officer ordinarily:
is prohibited from making a warrantless, non-consensual entry into a suspect's home to make a routine felony arrest unless exigent circumstances excuse the lack of a warran
Arrests involve which of the following characteristics
need probable cause to support them
usually involve removal to a police station
probably cause to arrest:
- requires enough facts to lead a police officer to the reasonable belief that the person arrested has committed a crime.
- is an objective standard
In Graham v. O'Connor (1989), involving the arrest of a diabetic who was suffering from an insulin reaction, the Supreme Court held that claims of excessive force in the course of making an arrest are to be analyzed under
the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard
Whether Fourth Amendment seizures are stops or arrests depends on:
In the U.S. Supreme Court case Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, the Court
- decided the arrest was unreasonable because it was not supported by probable cause.
- decided the arrest was reasonable because state law allowed it.
the vast majority of arrests
are made without the use of any force
Which of the following constitute exigent circumstances that would allow police to enter a home without a warrant to arrest a suspect?
- reasonable belief the suspect in the home is armed
- likelihood the suspect would escape if not arrested quickly
- police are chasing a fleeing felon who enters a home
- police have reason to believe the suspect is dangerous to others in the home
Which of the following actions may a police officer take immediately after an arrest?
- search the suspect
- use force to subdue unruly suspects to prevent escape
- conduct a search of the suspect
- interrogate the suspect
When an official takes a person into custody and holds him for anywhere between a few hours to a few days to answer for a criminal charge, the official has conducted
Stops differ from arrests in that:
- they occur in public places
- they are shorter in duration
In building probable cause, police officers may rely on what they:
In Brigham City Utah v. Charles Stuart and Others (2006), involving police entering a home without a warrant where teenagers were partying, drinking, and officers observed an altercation occurring inside the home, the Supreme Court ruled that:
the officers had the right to enter without a warrant because they had an objectively reasonable basis for believing someone in the home was seriously injured or being threatened with imminent injury.
According to the Supreme Court in Draper v. U.S., involving a narcotics arrest based on an informant's description of a suspect:
hearsay can be used to determine probable cause
After an arrest, which of the following do the
not commonly do?
take DNA samples from the arrested person
In regard to seizures, the Supreme Court in Payton v. New York held that the Fourth Amendment
usually requires a warrant to enter a private home to arrest a citizen.
Examples of direct evidence that police can use to build probable cause include
- DNA profile.
- suspect fleeing an officer.
- suspect making furtive movements.
the crime of perjury is defined as
lying under oath
concerning pretext searches:
- they are powerful investigative tools that police use to gather evidence against suspects.
- the Supreme Court has decided that they do not violate the Fourth Amendment.
The reasonableness of searches pursuant to search warrants depends on
- the existence of probable cause.
- the extent of the search.
- the particularity of the warrant.
- the manner in which the police enter the place to be searched
The major issue of contention between the Supreme Court majority opinion and the dissenting opinion in Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, the case involving the consent search of the defendant's car, was
whether the police must inform a suspect of her right to refuse consent to a consent search
Concerning third party consent to search, in which of the following situations can one person consent to a search for the other person
a factory owner consenting to a search of items on top of an employee's workbench
Under the holding in Chimel v. California (1969), a leading Supreme Court case on searches incident to arrest, the police must limit a thorough search incident to arrest to:
the arrestee's person and the area within his immediate control.
According to the empirical research about consent searches:
lower courts find that consent was voluntary in all but the most extreme cases
Police ordinarily seek consent to search
when they do not have probable cause and cannot get a warrant.
Who among the following can give consent for a third person?
- parents for their minor children.
- roommates, consenting to searches of the common areas, for those who share apartments with them.
- wife consents to a search of house she shares with spouse.
In order to conduct a consent search of a person, an officer must have
voluntary consent to search
regarding content searches:
- they may be authorized by persons other than the owner of the property searched.
- the scope of the search may be limited by the person consenting.
- according to recent case law, the consent to search may be withdrawn at any time.
According to the Supreme Court's decision in Whren v. U.S, concerning the use of a pretext arrest in a drug search:
a search incident to a lawful arrest for a traffic violation is a reasonable Fourth Amendment search
According to the Court of Appeals decision in United States v. Rodney:
consent to search a person includes consent to frisk the groin area
Which of the following government interests are protected by the rule that searches incident to arrest are reasonable?
- the interest in protecting law enforcement officers
- the interest in preserving evidence
- the interest in preventing the escape of suspects
Generally, no-knock entries to execute search warrants are permitted if certain conditions exist. These conditions include:
- a situation where the suspect might easily destroy evidence.
- an announced entry would endanger the officers' safety.
In Wilson v. Arkansas, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that:
ordinarily, the Fourth Amendment requires police knock and announce
Which of the following have courts adopted to justify the diminished Fourth Amendment rights of parolees and probationers?
- Parolees are under constructive custody and hence do not have full Fourth Amendment rights.
- Probation is an "act of grace" giving the government the power to impose conditions that infringe upon Fourth Amendment rights.
- Consent to search is part of the "contract" of release.
The Supreme Court ruled in Vernonia v. School District of Acton (1995):
random, suspicionless drug testing of student athletes does not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Which of the following prisoner searches conducted without probable cause do not violate the Fourth Amendment if they follow contact with visitors?
- cell searches
- full body searches
- strip searches
- body cavity searches
According to the court in Bull v. City and County of San Francisco (2010), involving strip searches of all arrested persons who were admitted to the general population at the San Francisco jail:
the strip searches did not violate the Fourth Amendment
In regard to school searches, the Supreme Court has declared
the legality of the search of a student should depend on the reasonableness, under all circumstances, of the search
Regarding probationers and parolees:
Correct parolees can be searched without either probable cause or warrants.
In order to meet constitutional standards, an inventory search:
must be done pursuant to written, established, police department procedures.
The Fourth Amendment law concerning parolees and probationers:
- permits the arrest of parolees and probationers without a warrant or probable cause.
- permits the search of a parolee's or probationer's car without a warrant or probable cause.
- permits the search of parolees and probationers without a warrant or probable cause.
- permits the search of a probationer's or parolee's home without a warrant or probable cause.
The special need used to justify employee drug testing is directed mainly at:
employees who may endanger public safety while under the influence of illegal drugs.
In National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, involving the employee drug testing program in the U.S. Customs Service, Justice Scalia dissented in part because he
failed to see any real problem demonstrated by the government that would be solved by the drug testing program.
Which of the following types of police questioning are excluded from the Miranda requirements?
- questioning at the scene of a crime
- volunteered statements of any kind
- questioning of individuals in the fact-finding process
- questioning that is part of an investigatory stop
According to the Supreme Court opinion in New York v. Quarles, involving a confession without Miranda warnings following an armed rape of a young woman:
- there is a public safety exception to the requirement that police give Miranda warnings.
- the availability of the public safety exception does not depend on the motivation of the individual officers involved.
- the public safety exception weakens the clarity of the Miranda rule.
- the need for answers to questions in a situation posing a threat to public safety outweighs the need for the rule protecting the privilege
According to the courts, waiver of Fifth Amendment rights:
- requires knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver
The constitutional bases for the law of confessions include:
- due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Sixth Amendment right-to-counsel.
- Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination.
Before formal proceedings begin, the __________ Amendment gives police more flexibility in interrogating suspects.
Miranda warnings are not required in questioning associated with which of the following situations?
- traffic violations
- driver's license checks
- persons detained during execution of search warrants
In Berkemer v. McCarty, the case involving whether Miranda warnings must be given to stopped motorists, the Court:
said a routine traffic stop was not custody for purposes of Miranda
According to the Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, involving a man who confessed to rape following police interrogation
the Fifth Amendment protects suspects during custodial police interrogation
The Supreme Court has ruled that which test or standard applies to evaluating the meaning of interrogation under the Sixth Amendment right to counsel?
did the police deliberately try to elicit a response
Under the accusatorial system rationale, forced confessions violate due process, even if they are true, because:
under our system the state has the burden of proving guilt
Based on their research of 125 proven false confessions, Richard Leo and Steven Drizen concluded:
the problem of false confessions may be more serious than previously thought
Research by psychologists shows that jurors may give credit to confessions obtained during high-pressure interrogation because:
of fundamental attribution error
According to former Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter regarding interrogation and confessions:
Where innocent human witnesses cannot be found, nothing remains but interrogation to get information from guilty persons.
Which of these rationales has the Supreme Court used in reviewing state confessions?
- the unreliability of coerced confessions
- the accusatorial system rationale
- the free will rationale
The right to remain silent can be traced back in history to the:
Correct laws of Moses embodied in the Talmudic law.
If the police come across containers and believe that the containers contain evidence of crime:
- they can briefly detain the containers to prevent their loss or destruction.
- they may seize and search containers when they have probable cause to believe the containers in vehicles contain evidence of crime.
The landmark Supreme Court case of Tennessee v. Garner (1985) involved the authority of police to use deadly force to stop fleeing felons. In this case, the Supreme Court held that:
deadly force could be used only if the officer using deadly force had probable cause to believe the fleeing felon posed a physical danger to himself or others.
Historically, before the second half of the Twentieth Century, U.S. prisoners:
Correct had almost no rights under the Constitution.
which of the following searches are considered special needs searches?
concerning the scope of content searches:
- consent searches are unreasonable if they exceed the scope of the consent.
- consent searches are unreasonable if they exceed the apparent authority of the person giving the consent.
- the test to determine the reasonableness of a consent search is based on the totality of the circumstances.
- the test to determine the reasonableness of a consent search is whether the officers reasonably believe that the search is within the scope of consent obtained.
Sociologist Richard Leo, based on his studies of confessions, concluded that:
Correct only one in four suspects invoke their Miranda rights
In Arizona v. Gant (2009), the Supreme Court ruled:
police may search a vehicle incident to an occupant's arrest only if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search or it's reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence related to the offense of arrest.
The vehicle exception to the warrant requirement is based upon:
- the inherent mobility of the vehicle.
- the reduced expectation of privacy in vehicles.
Police officers at the scene of a fire:
- do not need a warrant to remain in a burned building to look for injured victims.
- do not need a warrant to remain in a burned building to investigate the cause of the fire or explosion.
- must get a warrant to search for evidence of crime once they determine the cause of the fire.
Concerning third party consent to search, in which of the following situations can one person consent to a search for the other person?
a factory owner consenting to a search of items on top of an employee's workbench
With regard to prisoners, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that:
- they are subject to full body searches without probable cause following contact with visitors.
- their Fourth Amendment rights are diminished.
a special need that justifies airport searches
protection for air travelers
In Wyoming v. Houghton, concerning the search of a passenger's purse for drugs based on probable cause that drugs are in the vehicle, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that:
the police may inspect passengers' belongings that are capable of concealing the object of the search.
In Colorado v. Connelly (1986), the Supreme Court considered the case of a mentally ill man who walked into a police station and confessed he had murdered a young woman. The Court determined that:
Connelly's confession was voluntary because it was not compelled.
Most cases demand that arrest warrants identify the person to be arrested:
with reasonable certainty.
When a suspect asks for an attorney during custodial interrogation:
police must stop questioning until an attorney is present or the suspect initiates further conversation with them.
In Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, the Supreme Court ruled that:
the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit a warrantless arrest for a minor offense, including a traffic misdemeanor violation.
In North Carolina v. Butler, the U.S. Supreme Court found that:
express waivers of Miranda rights are not required.
Which of the following has the Supreme Court identified as legitimate purposes for inventory searches?
- protection of owners' property while in police custody
- to protect police from law suits
- to protect detained suspects from danger
probable cause deals with:
factual and practical considerations of everyday life
The Fourth Amendment particularity requirement for search warrants:
requires that the warrant specifically describe the place to be searched and the things to be seized.
Federal law enforcement officers can phone or radio their affidavits seeking warrants to federal magistrates under the:
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The three countervailing law enforcement interests against "no-knock" entry requirements identified by Justice Thomas in Wilson v. Arkansas include:
- safety of officers.
- escape of prisoner.
- destruction of evidence.
which is true about containers?
No warrant is needed if the container is found in a car the police have probable cause to search, and the container is a likely place where the items searched for may be found.
In applying the definition of custodial interrogation to actual cases, which of the following circumstances are relevant to determining if a suspect is in custody?
- whether officers had probable cause to arrest
- whether the investigation had focused on the suspect at the time
- the officers' language in summoning suspects
- the physical surroundings of the interrogation
Which of the following elements do the variety of special needs searches have in common?
- They are directed primarily at citizens generally, not those suspected of crime.
- Although they have a regulatory purpose they can result in criminal prosecution.
- Their reasonableness depends on balancing special government needs beyond law enforcement and privacy.
In determining the reasonableness of airport searches, courts:
have held they entail minimal intrusions that apply to all passengers.
Concerning student searches conducted by public school officials, the Supreme Court has held:
- the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures applies to searches conducted by school officials.
- children, while in school, possess a reasonable expectation of privacy
the fourth amendment:
includes searches which go beyond the needs of criminal law enforcement
In screening the police procedures that are used during the accusatory stage of the criminal process, the courts recognize:
the needs of law enforcement and the privacy and liberty interests of individual citizens.
With regard to border searches, the U.S. Supreme Court has found that:
the national interest in controlling the nation's borders outweighs the invasion of privacy caused by routine border searches.
Which of the following are necessary parts of the Miranda warnings?
- informed of the right to remain silent
- informed of the right to consult an attorney
- informed that an attorney will be provided the suspect if he is indigent and cannot afford an attorney
According to the Supreme Court, in order to conduct a routine search at the border, officers need:
no probable cause, reasonable suspicion, or a warrant.
Which of the following are examples of knowing waivers of a suspect's rights after being read his Miranda rights?
- The suspect invoked his right to counsel, and after a five hour ride in the back of a police car, he signed a waiver when police asked if there was anything he wanted to say.
- The suspect talked to police after he refused to sign an express waiver.
In Schmerber v. California, a case involving the compelled extraction of blood from a drunk driving suspect, the U.S. Supreme Court:
- found that compulsion that makes a suspect the source of physical evidence does not violate the Fifth Amendment.
- found that such compelled extractions do not violate the due process clause.
- found the 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination only protects someone from being compelled to give evidence of a testimonial nature.
- found that the Fifth Amendment privilege is fulfilled when a person is guaranteed the right to be silent unless he chooses to speak of his own free will.
In South Dakota v. Opperman (1976), the police conducted an inventory search in which they searched Opperman's car after towing it to an impound lot because it was parked illegally. They found marijuana during a search of the glove compartment. The Supreme Court decided that:
the search of the glove compartment did not violate the U.S. Constitution because it was a legitimate inventory search
Joan Smith is entering the United States at the Canadian border. Officers have reasonable suspicion to believe she is smuggling drugs. Which of the following searches of Joan may the officers lawfully conduct?
- routine border search
- a strip search of her person
- a search of her handbag
Frank is an inmate at Greensburg State Prison and he has just had a contact visit with an old friend. Before Frank returns to his cell, prison guards subject Frank to a strip search. Such a search is:
constitutional, because prisoners have a diminished expectation of privacy and there is an important government need to maintain prison security.
The Supreme Court in Ferguson v. City of Charleston (2001), involving state hospital obstetric patients who were pregnant and arrested for child abuse after testing positive for cocaine, decided that:
the warrantless, suspicionless, and nonconsensual searches violated the Fourth Amendment
Exceptions to the search warrant requirement exist because:
- the clear rule that warrants are required is unworkable.
- officers become frustrated with the delay that getting a warrant involves.
- to enforce the requirement would lead to the exclusion of evidence in cases where police activity was reasonable.
Jail detainees, not yet convicted of a crime:
have the diminished Fourth Amendment rights and can be searched without probable cause
The need for prison and jail security permits searches without probable cause or a warrant of:
- pretrial detainees.
- employees of the prison.
- visitors to the prison.
In order to be valid, arrest warrants must satisfy certain requirements; these requirements include:
= a neutral magistrate to determine probable cause to arrest.
- a sworn statement of facts supporting probable cause.
- specific identification of the person to be arrested.
According to Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, Chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials appointed by President Truman:
- uncontrolled searches and seizures are one of the first and most effective weapons of every arbitrary government.
- the right against searches and seizures is one of the most difficult to protect.
- Americans do not fully appreciate the importance of the Fourth Amendment protection
Which of the following items may be considered containers for purposes of Fourth Amendment searches without warrants?
- a brown paper bag
- a small briefcase
- a sport duffel bag
- a backpack
What goes on during interrogation:
occurs in private and hence is not widely known.
According to the Supreme Court opinion in Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, involving a search of a car obtained by consent:
- the question of whether consent was voluntary is a question of fact to be determined by the totality of all the circumstances.
- the government need not prove that citizens know they have a right to refuse consent.
In Graham v. O'Connor (1989), involving the arrest of a diabetic who was suffering from an insulin reaction, the Supreme Court indicated that:
the question in excessive force cases is whether an officer's actions are objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to his underlying intent.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case Brown v. Mississippi, involving the beating and torture of three black suspects to obtain a confession:
- the Supreme Court relied upon the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause.
- the Supreme Court held that forced confessions were not admissible as evidence.
In U.S. v. Robinson (1973), the police had stopped the defendant for driving with a revoked driver's permit. The Supreme Court's ruling with respect to the legality of the search of the defendant is important because it held that:
a search incident to a full custody arrest may be conducted regardless of the likelihood of finding weapons or evidence on the arrestee's person.
The Fifth Amendment approach to confession applies:
only when the person being questioned is in custody.
Which of the following types of information do courts refuse to accept alone as sufficient information to establish probable cause to arrest?
In Samson v. California (2006), the Supreme Court ruled that:
a police officer is not prohibited from conducting a suspicionless search of a parolee.
Probable cause to arrest:
- requires enough facts to lead a police officer to the reasonable belief that the person arrested has committed a crime.
- is an objective standard.
The Supreme Court's use of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination approach in reviewing state confession cases began with:
miranda v. arizona
In Illinois v. Rodriguez (1990), the police conducted the consent search of the suspect's apartment based on the consent of the suspect's former girlfriend. According to the Supreme Court's opinion:
the warrantless entry to search based on third party consent is valid if the officer reasonably believes that the person consenting had authority to consent.
the majority of arrests
do not require a warrant to make the arrest reasonable as long as there is probable cause to arrest.
Which of the following firsthand facts and circumstances may an officer use to develop probable cause to arrest a suspect?
- furtive movements by the suspect
- an attempt by the suspect to destroy evidence
- evasive answers by the suspect
- the suspect resisting the officer
Which of the following hardships are characteristic of an arrest?
- It may last for hours or even days.
- It produces written documents that become part of a person's record.
- It can produce fear and anxiety that are an emotional stress on the suspect.
- It can interfere with the suspect earning a living.