4 Written questions
4 Multiple choice questions
- (1987) "Honest Mistake" clause made when drugs were found with a warrant for a different location, but unintentionally.
- (1976) "Hot Pursuit" clause made, meaning evidence is admissible if found during hot pursuit.
- (1944) the Fourteenth Amendment did not impose specific limitations on criminal justice in the states, and that illegally obtained evidence did not necessarily have to be excluded from trials in all cases.
- (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.
4 True/False questions
Weeks v US → (1976) "Hot Pursuit" clause made, meaning evidence is admissible if found during hot pursuit.
US v Leon → (1984) If effort to get a legitimate warrant was made in "good faith" then evidence is admissible.
Miranda v Arizona → (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.
Mapp v Ohio → (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.