4 Written questions
4 Multiple choice questions
- (1984) If effort to get a legitimate warrant was made in "good faith" then evidence is admissible.
- (1964) 6th Amendment applies during interrogation. (Escobedo is interrogated without lawyer and eventually confesses). S.C. rules interrogation illegal because lawyer wasn't present - Suspect's right to an attorney DURING police interrogation.
- (1961) Person is searched and the cops find pornography(against Ohio law), but court found the evidence inadmissible. Exclusionary rule had to be binding on all state cases.
- (1914) Established exclusionary rule, evidence gotten without a warrant isn't admissable in a federal court
4 True/False questions
Nix v Williams → (1984) The evidence pertaining to the discovery and condition of the victim's body was properly admitted at respondent's second trial on the ground that it would ultimately or inevitably have been discovered even if no violation of any constitutional provision had taken place.
Santana v US → (1914) Established exclusionary rule, evidence gotten without a warrant isn't admissable in a federal court
Maryland v Garrison → (1966) Ernesto Miranda confesses to raping a girl, but wasn't made aware of his protection in the bill of rights. Supreme Court held that criminal suspects must be informed of their right to consult with an attorney and of their right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police.
Miranda v Arizona → (1987) "Honest Mistake" clause made when drugs were found with a warrant for a different location, but unintentionally.