SUBJECTS
|
BROWSE
|
CAREER CENTER
|
POPULAR
|
JOIN
|
LOGIN
Business Skills
|
Soft Skills
|
Basic Literacy
|
Certifications
About
|
Help
|
Privacy
|
Terms
|
Email
Search
Test your basic knowledge |
Criminal Law 101: Court Cases
Start Test
Study First
Subject
:
law
Instructions:
Answer 50 questions in 15 minutes.
If you are not ready to take this test, you can
study here
.
Match each statement with the correct term.
Don't refresh. All questions and answers are randomly picked and ordered every time you load a test.
This is a study tool. The 3 wrong answers for each question are randomly chosen from answers to other questions. So, you might find at times the answers obvious, but you will see it re-enforces your understanding as you take the test each time.
1. Parolees have no right to legal counsel at parole revocation hearings
WILSON v ARKANSAS
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
2. The erroneous admission of a coerced confession at trial does not constitute grounds for an automatic mistrial; in some cases - an involuntary confession can be taken and legally admitted as evidence; the totality of the circumstances is to be consid
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
3. Illegally seized evidence can be used to impeach a witness who takes the stand during a trial
U.S. v HAVENS
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
MARYLAND v BUIE
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
4. Even when armed with a warrant - the police generally must 'knock and announce' before entering a home
WILSON v SEITER...
WILSON v ARKANSAS
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
5. Defendants have the right to trial by jury if the potential sentence is more than six months of incarceration (see also Baldwin v New York)
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
FLORIDA v ROYER
TERRY v OHIO
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
6. Suspects must be informed of their basic rights at the point of arrest - particularly the right to remain silent and the right to have counsel present during any interrogations; confessions must meet the tests of voluntariness and awareness
ELKINS v U.S
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
7. Randomized consent searches of individuals who are on public transportation is acceptable - even though such searches carry some degree of implied coercion and are not truly voluntary; the governing test is whether a reasonable person feels free to d
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
BRADY v U.S
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
8. Juvenile court proceedings must possess the elements of basic fundamental fairness; juveniles have the right to a proper hearing - to have an advance notification of that hearing and its purpose - the right to be present at the hearing - the right to
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
IN RE WINSHIP...
IN RE GAULT...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
9. Defendants are entitled to a limited number of habeas appeals in capital cases
SHERMAN v U.S....
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
10. Dangerousness test - bail may be denied if there is clear and convincing evidence that defendant are dangerous and pose a threat to the community at large and the court participants in particular
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
U.S. v SALERNO
11. Garbage containers outside of the curtilage of the home are considered abandoned and may be searched without a warrant and without cause
SINGER v U.S
ROPER v SIMMONS...
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
12. If the criminal conduct is the product of government agent creativity/if the government induced the individual to commit a crime that they otherwise would not have committed - the government action would be considered entrapment and the individual wo
STACK v BOYLE
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
U.S. v SALERNO
SHERMAN v U.S....
13. Made it more difficult for inmates to win unconstitutional conditions of confinement cases; inmates must demonstrate specific unconstitutional conditions of confinement - and specific intent on the part of specific prison officials to maintain those
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
U.S. v LEON
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
WILSON v SEITER...
14. Totality of the circumstances test - taken piecemeal - the evidence may not amount to probable cause - but if taken together as a whole the evidence achieves that level - the legal standard of proof for the search has been met
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
ILLINOIS v GATES
U.S. v HENSLEY
15. The death penalty is not being administered equitably
GREGG v GEORGIA...
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
ILLINOIS v GATES
NIX v WILLIAMS
16. Probationers have the right to an attorney at probation revocation hearings
FLORIDA v ROYER
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
BRADY v U.S
HARRIS v U.S.
17. Inmates have the right to an institutional disciplinary hearing - written advance notice of the hearing - to present evidence/witnesses/testify in their own behalf at the hearing - and a formal ruling is to be placed in their file
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
WILSON v SEITER...
18. Evidence that is unlawfully seized by any official cannot be used in federal court; the exclusionary rule is applied to the federal courts
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
ELKINS v U.S
19. The death penalty cannot be administered to those who were 17 years of age or under when the offense was committed
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
ROPER v SIMMONS...
20. Officers may search the suspect and the adjoining space region incident to a lawful arrest; if there is reasonable suspicion to believe that there is hidden danger present - officers may conduct a protective sweep of the area - but it is only to be a
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
MARYLAND v BUIE
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
21. Police may stop and search a vehicle without a warrant if there is probable cause to believe that the vehicle is carrying individuals or articles that offend the law - and the vehicle is now or is about to be moved
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
FLORIDA v ROYER
U.S. v ROSS
CARROLL v U.S
22. A vehicle that has been impounded by police officials can be searched in its entirety; all items found in the vehicle - include closed and locked items - may also searched
U.S. v SOKOLOW
GREGG v GEORGIA...
COLORADO v BERTINE
MARYLAND v BUIE
23. Civil forfeitures under RICO are not automatic; they require a separate civil proceeding
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
ROPER v SIMMONS...
24. Reasonable suspicion is the standard to be used by public school officials to conduct searches on public school grounds of individuals who may be violating either the law or school rules
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
NEW JERSEY v TLO
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
25. An investigatory search may be conducted if the totality of the circumstances establishes reasonable suspicion to believe that a person matches the drug courier profile
U.S. v SOKOLOW
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
COLORADO v BERTINE
U.S. v HENSLEY
26. Police may conduct brief - scientifically random/systemic - suspicionless searches of motorists at fixed roadside checkpoints
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
HARRIS v U.S.
STACK v BOYLE
DELAWARE v PROUSE
27. Evidence illegally seized by a federal official cannot be used in federal court
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
MAPP v OHIO
WEEKS v U.S
SINGER v U.S
28. Defendants have no Constitutional right to waive a jury trial
SINGER v U.S
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
WILSON v ARKANSAS
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
29. Plain view doctrine - if the officer is legally present - the offending objects are in plain view - and the incriminating nature is readily apparent - the items may be seized without a warrant
DELAWARE v PROUSE
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
WILSON v SEITER...
HARRIS v U.S.
30. Apparent authority doctrine - if consent to search is given by someone who does not have the authority to do so - but the police reasonably believed they did - the evidence is still admissible in court
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
D.C. v HELLER
GREGG v GEORGIA...
31. Bail bond agents may use physical force to capture their bondees who have skipped bail - as long as the force used is reasonably related to the custody and/or transportation of the bondees
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
STACK v BOYLE
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
32. Allows the death penalty to be administered as long as the capital sentence is not mandatory - aggravating and mitigating circumstances are considered - and a bifurcated proceeding (i.e. - different judges determine guilt and sentence)
GREGG v GEORGIA...
IN RE WINSHIP...
TERRY v OHIO
SHERMAN v U.S....
33. The right to counsel begins at the point of focus
D.C. v HELLER
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
NEW JERSEY v TLO
34. Once suspects invoke their right to an attorney - officials must cease questioning the suspect until counsel is present
NIX v WILLIAMS
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
U.S. v LEON
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
35. (good faith exemption) evidence seized by reasonably well- trained officers acting in good faith - is admissible - even if the seizure technically violated the law
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
WILSON v SEITER...
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
36. Indigents have the right to a legal counsel during the trial stage; the state will appoint an attorney to the case if the individual cannot afford one
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
U.S. v ROSS
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
37. The 2nd Amendment protects the right of individuals to possess a firearm for personal use; specifically - there is a constitutional right to keep a handgun in the home for self defense
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
D.C. v HELLER
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
38. Plea bargaining is legal as long as an attorney is present to protect the defendant's rights - the plea is voluntarily made - and the defendant has a full knowledge of the consequences
U.S. v DUNN
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
BRADY v U.S
ROPER v SIMMONS...
39. A stop and frisk search may be conducted when there is reasonable suspicion to believe that an individual is now or is about to engage in criminal behavior
U.S. v SALERNO
U.S. v ROSS
TERRY v OHIO
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
40. The standard proof in a juvenile court adjudication is beyond a reasonable doubt
GREGG v GEORGIA...
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
SHERMAN v U.S....
IN RE WINSHIP...
41. An illegally obtained confessions can be used to impeach the defendant's testimony at trial
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
HARRIS v U.S.
U.S. v LEON
COLORADO v BERTINE
42. Evidence discarded by an individual fleeing from the police is admissible in court - even if the police had no advance cause to focus attention upon the person who discarded the material
SHERMAN v U.S....
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
43. Inevitable discovery exemption - evidence that was illegallyseized may be used in court if it can be shown that it would have inevitably been discovered
WILSON v SEITER...
NIX v WILLIAMS
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
WILSON v ARKANSAS
44. Reasonable suspicion can be used as the basis for investigative searches and seizures in situations involving pre-eminent public interests; specifically - reasonable suspicion is the standard to be used to allow investigatory searches of individuals
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
FLORIDA v ROYER
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
45. A search cannot shock the conscience - and cannot be exploratory
SHERMAN v U.S....
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
MARYLAND v BUIE
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
46. No specific cause nor a search warrant is needed to search either open fields or non-habitable buildings (see also Oliver v U.S.)
U.S. v DUNN
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
IN RE WINSHIP...
WILSON v SEITER...
47. If probable cause of another offense arises during a routine vehicle/traffic stop - every occupant and every part of the vehicle and its contents - including closed and locked containers in the vehicle - may be searched; search justification arises o
U.S. v SALERNO
U.S. v ROSS
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
48. Liability under RICO requires some primary participation in the operation and management of the criminal enterprise
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
ROPER v SIMMONS...
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
GREGG v GEORGIA...
49. Requests for counsel during the police interrogation stage are offense specific (see also Minnick v Mississippi)
U.S. v SALERNO
ROPER v SIMMONS...
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
50. A stop and frisk search may be performed when there isreasonable suspicion to believe that the offender has violated the law - past tense
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
BRADY v U.S
U.S. v HENSLEY
CARROLL v U.S