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. 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)
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
GREGG v GEORGIA...
WILSON v SEITER...
SINGER v U.S
2. 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
D.C. v HELLER
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
3. 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
IN RE GAULT...
FLORIDA v ROYER
COLORADO v BERTINE
U.S. v SOKOLOW
4. 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
IN RE GAULT...
HARRIS v U.S.
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
5. Inevitable discovery exemption - evidence that was illegallyseized may be used in court if it can be shown that it would have inevitably been discovered
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
U.S. v SALERNO
NIX v WILLIAMS
WILSON v SEITER...
6. The death penalty cannot be administered to those who were 17 years of age or under when the offense was committed
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
ROPER v SIMMONS...
U.S. v SOKOLOW
7. 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
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
WILSON v SEITER...
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
8. 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
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
HERRERA v COLLINS...
U.S. v ROSS
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
9. Capital punishment is not a suitable penalty for mentally retarded defendants; such a penalty is excessive - when involving mentally retarded defendants
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
ROPER v SIMMONS...
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
10. (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
U.S. v LEON
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
11. 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 HENSLEY
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
BRADY v U.S
12. 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
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
U.S. v SALERNO
13. An illegally obtained confessions can be used to impeach the defendant's testimony at trial
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
COLORADO v BERTINE
MARYLAND v BUIE
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
14. 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
U.S. v HAVENS
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
MARYLAND v BUIE
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
15. 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
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
16. 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
GREGG v GEORGIA...
D.C. v HELLER
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
17. 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
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
WILSON v SEITER...
18. Parolees have no right to legal counsel at parole revocation hearings
GREGG v GEORGIA...
NEW JERSEY v TLO
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
19. Garbage containers outside of the curtilage of the home are considered abandoned and may be searched without a warrant and without cause
U.S. v SALERNO
ROPER v SIMMONS...
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
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
ILLINOIS v GATES
NEW JERSEY v TLO
TERRY v OHIO
HERRERA v COLLINS...
21. 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
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
22. 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
ILLINOIS v GATES
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
TERRY v OHIO
D.C. v HELLER
23. 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
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
SINGER v U.S
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
TERRY v OHIO
24. No specific cause nor a search warrant is needed to search either open fields or non-habitable buildings (see also Oliver v U.S.)
DELAWARE v PROUSE
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
U.S. v DUNN
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
25. Evidence that is unlawfully seized by any official cannot be used in federal court; the exclusionary rule is applied to the federal courts
ELKINS v U.S
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
WILSON v SEITER...
U.S. v LEON
26. Police may conduct brief - scientifically random/systemic - suspicionless searches of motorists at fixed roadside checkpoints
DELAWARE v PROUSE
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
27. 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 GATES
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
U.S. v SALERNO
28. 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
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
STACK v BOYLE
U.S. v ROSS
DELAWARE v PROUSE
29. Requests for counsel during the police interrogation stage are offense specific (see also Minnick v Mississippi)
D.C. v HELLER
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
GREGG v GEORGIA...
COLORADO v BERTINE
30. Assets forfeited under RICO are limited to those that were gained from and/or used in the criminal enterprise
U.S. v DUNN
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
IN RE GAULT...
31. 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
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
CARROLL v U.S
HARRIS v U.S.
U.S. v LEON
32. 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
IN RE GAULT...
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
U.S. v ROSS
IN RE WINSHIP...
33. 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
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
COLORADO v BERTINE
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
34. Specific intent to discriminate against an individual must be demonstrated before that individual's death sentence can be set aside; intent over impact
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
DELAWARE v PROUSE
MAPP v OHIO
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
35. 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
ROPER v SIMMONS...
U.S. v HENSLEY
CARROLL v U.S
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
36. Illegally seized evidence can be used to impeach a witness who takes the stand during a trial
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
COLORADO v BERTINE
U.S. v HAVENS
37. 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 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
U.S. v LEON
U.S. v SALERNO
SINGER v U.S
38. The standard proof in a juvenile court adjudication is beyond a reasonable doubt
FLORIDA v ROYER
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
IN RE WINSHIP...
39. 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
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
40. Once suspects invoke their right to an attorney - officials must cease questioning the suspect until counsel is present
HARRIS v U.S.
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
41. Liability under RICO requires some primary participation in the operation and management of the criminal enterprise
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
WILSON v SEITER...
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
WEEKS v U.S
42. The right to counsel begins at the point of focus
D.C. v HELLER
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
U.S. v HENSLEY
ILLINOIS v GATES
43. There is no right to a jury trial for juveniles being adjudicated in juvenile court
U.S. v DUNN
U.S. v HAVENS
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
44. Newly discovered evidence demonstrating the actual innocence of the person sentenced to death does not provide automatic habeas corpus relief
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
HERRERA v COLLINS...
NEW JERSEY v TLO
45. 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
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
U.S. v SOKOLOW
U.S. v HENSLEY
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
46. Probationers have the right to an attorney at probation revocation hearings
HARRIS v U.S.
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
47. Defendants have no Constitutional right to waive a jury trial
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
IN RE WINSHIP...
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
SINGER v U.S
48. The death penalty is not being administered equitably
FLORIDA v ROYER
DELAWARE v PROUSE
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
49. A stop and frisk search may be performed when there isreasonable suspicion to believe that the offender has violated the law - past tense
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
U.S. v HENSLEY
50. Even when armed with a warrant - the police generally must 'knock and announce' before entering a home
WEEKS v U.S
NEW JERSEY v TLO
WILSON v ARKANSAS
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...