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. Requests for counsel during the police interrogation stage are offense specific (see also Minnick v Mississippi)
D.C. v HELLER
DELAWARE v PROUSE
STACK v BOYLE
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
2. Capital punishment is not a suitable penalty for mentally retarded defendants; such a penalty is excessive - when involving mentally retarded defendants
NEW JERSEY v TLO
COLORADO v BERTINE
IN RE WINSHIP...
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
3. 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
COLORADO v BERTINE
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
D.C. v HELLER
TERRY v OHIO
4. 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
WEEKS v U.S
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
CARROLL v U.S
5. Exclusionary Rule applied to the states - evidence unlawfully seized is inadmissible in court
MAPP v OHIO
NIX v WILLIAMS
BRADY v U.S
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
6. 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
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
7. 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
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
TERRY v OHIO
U.S. v HENSLEY
8. Newly discovered evidence demonstrating the actual innocence of the person sentenced to death does not provide automatic habeas corpus relief
HERRERA v COLLINS...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
U.S. v DUNN
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
9. 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
GREGG v GEORGIA...
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
U.S. v DUNN
U.S. v SOKOLOW
10. Police may conduct brief - scientifically random/systemic - suspicionless searches of motorists at fixed roadside checkpoints
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
DELAWARE v PROUSE
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
U.S. v SALERNO
11. The death penalty cannot be administered to those who were 17 years of age or under when the offense was committed
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
ROPER v SIMMONS...
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
MAPP v OHIO
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
HERRERA v COLLINS...
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
SHERMAN v U.S....
ELKINS v U.S
13. (good faith exemption) evidence seized by reasonably well- trained officers acting in good faith - is admissible - even if the seizure technically violated the law
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
ILLINOIS v GATES
ELKINS v U.S
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
14. Defendants are entitled to a limited number of habeas appeals in capital cases
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
COLORADO v BERTINE
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
15. Assets forfeited under RICO are limited to those that were gained from and/or used in the criminal enterprise
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
FLORIDA v ROYER
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
HARRIS v U.S.
16. The standard proof in a juvenile court adjudication is beyond a reasonable doubt
CARROLL v U.S
IN RE WINSHIP...
U.S. v LEON
WILSON v SEITER...
17. Parolees have no right to legal counsel at parole revocation hearings
HERRERA v COLLINS...
WILSON v ARKANSAS
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
18. Garbage containers outside of the curtilage of the home are considered abandoned and may be searched without a warrant and without cause
MAPP v OHIO
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
U.S. v DUNN
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
19. 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
COLORADO v BERTINE
ROPER v SIMMONS...
SHERMAN v U.S....
MARYLAND v BUIE
20. 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
COLORADO v BERTINE
ROPER v SIMMONS...
NEW JERSEY v TLO
HERRERA v COLLINS...
21. Specific intent to discriminate against an individual must be demonstrated before that individual's death sentence can be set aside; intent over impact
MAPP v OHIO
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
22. Evidence illegally seized by a federal official cannot be used in federal court
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
WEEKS v U.S
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
CARROLL v U.S
23. Evidence that is unlawfully seized by any official cannot be used in federal court; the exclusionary rule is applied to the federal courts
U.S. v ROSS
ELKINS v U.S
U.S. v LEON
NIX v WILLIAMS
24. Defendants have no Constitutional right to waive a jury trial
WILSON v SEITER...
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
NIX v WILLIAMS
SINGER v U.S
25. Even when armed with a warrant - the police generally must 'knock and announce' before entering a home
ROPER v SIMMONS...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
SHERMAN v U.S....
WILSON v ARKANSAS
26. 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
U.S. v HAVENS
FLORIDA v ROYER
MAPP v OHIO
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
27. Liability under RICO requires some primary participation in the operation and management of the criminal enterprise
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
U.S. v HAVENS
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
28. 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
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
BRADY v U.S
DELAWARE v PROUSE
ILLINOIS v GATES
29. Failure to appear test - bail may be denied if there is probable cause to believe that defendants will fail to appear at future judicial proceedings
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
STACK v BOYLE
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
30. 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)
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
MAPP v OHIO
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
HERRERA v COLLINS...
31. 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 ROSS
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
NIX v WILLIAMS
32. Illegally seized evidence can be used to impeach a witness who takes the stand during a trial
U.S. v HAVENS
BRADY v U.S
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
33. Evidence seized by reasonably well- trained officers acting in good faith - is admissible - even if the seizure technically violated the law; known as the good faith exemption
U.S. v LEON
BRADY v U.S
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
34. There is no right to a jury trial for juveniles being adjudicated in juvenile court
FLORIDA v ROYER
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
35. 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
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
WILSON v SEITER...
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
36. 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
U.S. v HAVENS
CARROLL v U.S
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
37. Once suspects invoke their right to an attorney - officials must cease questioning the suspect until counsel is present
U.S. v HENSLEY
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
IN RE GAULT...
38. 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
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
U.S. v LEON
MARYLAND v BUIE
ILLINOIS v GATES
39. A search cannot shock the conscience - and cannot be exploratory
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
NEW JERSEY v TLO
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
TERRY v OHIO
40. 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
GREGG v GEORGIA...
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
U.S. v SOKOLOW
41. 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
IN RE GAULT...
SINGER v U.S
COLORADO v BERTINE
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
42. The right to counsel begins at the point of focus
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
IN RE GAULT...
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
43. 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
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
U.S. v SOKOLOW
NIX v WILLIAMS
U.S. v DUNN
44. An illegally obtained confessions can be used to impeach the defendant's testimony at trial
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
SINGER v U.S
U.S. v SOKOLOW
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
45. 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
BRADY v U.S
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
46. 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 ROSS
U.S. v HAVENS
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
BRADY v U.S
47. The death penalty is not being administered equitably
U.S. v HENSLEY
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
ROPER v SIMMONS...
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
48. Inevitable discovery exemption - evidence that was illegallyseized may be used in court if it can be shown that it would have inevitably been discovered
SHERMAN v U.S....
COLORADO v BERTINE
NIX v WILLIAMS
D.C. v HELLER
49. 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
U.S. v SALERNO
U.S. v HENSLEY
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
U.S. v DUNN
50. Civil forfeitures under RICO are not automatic; they require a separate civil proceeding
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
U.S. v LEON
McCLESKEY v KEMP...