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. 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
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
U.S. v HAVENS
2. Defendants are entitled to a limited number of habeas appeals in capital cases
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
GREGG v GEORGIA...
U.S. v SOKOLOW
U.S. v HAVENS
3. Capital punishment is not a suitable penalty for mentally retarded defendants; such a penalty is excessive - when involving mentally retarded defendants
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
WILSON v ARKANSAS
NIX v WILLIAMS
IN RE GAULT...
4. Probationers have the right to an attorney at probation revocation hearings
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
U.S. v HAVENS
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
5. 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
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
HARRIS v U.S.
ROPER v SIMMONS...
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
6. 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
MAPP v OHIO
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
7. 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
HERRERA v COLLINS...
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
U.S. v SOKOLOW
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
8. 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
U.S. v SOKOLOW
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
DELAWARE v PROUSE
U.S. v ROSS
9. There is no right to a jury trial for juveniles being adjudicated in juvenile court
IN RE WINSHIP...
ILLINOIS v GATES
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
WILSON v ARKANSAS
10. No specific cause nor a search warrant is needed to search either open fields or non-habitable buildings (see also Oliver v U.S.)
HARRIS v U.S.
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
MARYLAND v BUIE
U.S. v DUNN
11. Illegally seized evidence can be used to impeach a witness who takes the stand during a trial
STACK v BOYLE
IN RE WINSHIP...
U.S. v HAVENS
ATKINS v VIRGINIA...
12. Assets forfeited under RICO are limited to those that were gained from and/or used in the criminal enterprise
ILLINOIS v GATES
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
ELKINS v U.S
FLORIDA v ROYER
13. Inevitable discovery exemption - evidence that was illegallyseized may be used in court if it can be shown that it would have inevitably been discovered
McCLESKEY v ZANT...
STACK v BOYLE
NIX v WILLIAMS
U.S. v LEON
14. 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
ELKINS v U.S
CARROLL v U.S
D.C. v HELLER
15. 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
IN RE WINSHIP...
STACK v BOYLE
MINNICK v MISSISSIPPI...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
16. 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
SHERMAN v U.S....
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
SINGER v U.S
FLORIDA v ROYER
17. Even when armed with a warrant - the police generally must 'knock and announce' before entering a home
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
SINGER v U.S
WILSON v ARKANSAS
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
18. 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...
NEW JERSEY v TLO
19. The standard proof in a juvenile court adjudication is beyond a reasonable doubt
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
IN RE WINSHIP...
McKEIVER v PENNSYLVANIA...
20. 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
U.S. v LEON
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
ELKINS v U.S
21. The death penalty is not being administered equitably
ELKINS v U.S
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
WILSON v ARKANSAS
22. 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
BRADY v U.S
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
23. A search cannot shock the conscience - and cannot be exploratory
NIX v WILLIAMS
GREGG v GEORGIA...
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
ROCHIN v CALIFORNIA
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
BRADY v U.S
COLORADO v BERTINE
NEW JERSEY v TLO
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
25. 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...
SINGER v U.S
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
26. A stop and frisk search may be performed when there isreasonable suspicion to believe that the offender has violated the law - past tense
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
U.S. v HENSLEY
HARRIS v U.S.
27. 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...
U.S. v SOKOLOW
REVES v ERNST AND YOUNG
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
28. Civil forfeitures under RICO are not automatic; they require a separate civil proceeding
WEEKS v U.S
SINGER v U.S
U.S. v JAMES DANIEL GOOD
GAGNON v SCARPELLI...
29. 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
HARRIS v U.S.
SHERMAN v U.S....
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
IN RE GAULT...
30. Police may conduct brief - scientifically random/systemic - suspicionless searches of motorists at fixed roadside checkpoints
WILSON v ARKANSAS
DELAWARE v PROUSE
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
ILLINOIS v GATES
31. (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 JAMES DANIEL GOOD
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
SHERMAN v U.S....
32. The right to counsel begins at the point of focus
SINGER v U.S
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
WILSON v SEITER...
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
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
U.S. v HAVENS
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
COLORADO v BERTINE
IN RE WINSHIP...
34. 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
MIRANDA v ARIZONA...
DELAWARE v PROUSE
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
HARRIS v U.S.
35. Requests for counsel during the police interrogation stage are offense specific (see also Minnick v Mississippi)
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
ILLINOIS v GATES
MAPP v OHIO
McNEIL v WISCONSIN...
36. 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 ROYER
IN RE GAULT...
SHERMAN v U.S....
ARIZONA v FULMINANTE
37. 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
STACK v BOYLE
NEW JERSEY v TLO
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
U.S. v SALERNO
38. Parolees have no right to legal counsel at parole revocation hearings
IN RE WINSHIP...
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
CALIFORNIA v GREENWOOD
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
39. Exclusionary Rule applied to the states - evidence unlawfully seized is inadmissible in court
IN RE WINSHIP...
MAPP v OHIO
WEEKS v U.S
MORRISSEY v BREWER...
40. Defendants have no Constitutional right to waive a jury trial
SINGER v U.S
U.S. v ROSS
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
41. 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
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
MARYLAND v BUIE
ELKINS v U.S
MASSACHUSETTS v SHEPPARD
42. 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
TERRY v OHIO
GREGG v GEORGIA...
HARRIS v U.S.
43. Specific intent to discriminate against an individual must be demonstrated before that individual's death sentence can be set aside; intent over impact
U.S. v DUNN
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
NEW JERSEY v TLO
GIDEON v WAINWRIGHT...
44. 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)
FLORIDA v ROYER
U.S. v HENSLEY
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
IN RE WINSHIP...
45. 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
McCLESKEY v KEMP...
BRADY v U.S
HERRERA v COLLINS...
FURMAN v GEORGIA...
46. 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
CALIFORNIA v HODARI D
WILSON v SEITER...
WOLFF v McDONNELL...
47. The death penalty cannot be administered to those who were 17 years of age or under when the offense was committed
TAYLOR v TAINTOR
GREGG v GEORGIA...
ROPER v SIMMONS...
MICHIGAN v HARVEY...
48. 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
FLORIDA v BOSTICK
CARROLL v U.S
BRADY v U.S
WEEKS v U.S
49. 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
HARRIS v U.S.
ESCOBEDO v ILLINOIS...
U.S. v 92 BUENA VISTA AVENUE
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
50. 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
DUNCAN v LOUISIANA
ILLINOIS v GATES
ILLINOIS v RODRIGUEZ
WEEKS v U.S