chapter 8

Question 1

The taking of fingerprints and photographs and the confrontation for identification have been challenged on at least what three constitutional grounds?

Answer 1

1. self-incrimination2. right to counsel3. due process

Question 2

In Holt v US (1910), SCOTUS distinguished between a compelling a person to give _____ evidence and requiring him to submit to fingerprinting.

Answer 2

verbal

Question 3

In Schmerber v California (1966), SCOUTUS held that the priviledge (self-incrimination) protects an accused only from being compelled to testify against himself or otherwise provide the state with evidence of a ______ or ______ nature.

Answer 3

testimonial or communicative

Question 4

Schmerber v California (1966) set the standard that the 5th Amendment only applies to _____ evidence, not “___ evidence,” such as a photograph or fingerprint.

Answer 4

spoken, real

Question 5

In Schmerber v California (1966), SCOUTS further held that the self-incrimination privilege offers no protection against compulsion to submit what?

Answer 5

fingerprinting, photographing, or measurements, to write or speak for identification, to appear in court, to stand, to assume a stance, to walk, or to make a particular gesture

Question 6

In Smith v US (2000), SCOTUS ruled that the taking of palmprints or fingerprtins does not violate the self-incrimination protection of the Constitution if the person in lawful custody is required to submit to photographing and fingerprinting as part of a _____ _____ process.

Answer 6

routine identification

Question 7

In Pennsylvania v Muniz, SCOTUS ruled that checking a person for slurred speech or questions that require logic, but the answer is irrelevant (like saying ABCs backward) are not _____, and are admissible.

Answer 7

testimonial

Question 8

In Pennsylvania v Muniz, SCOTUS ruled that if the answer to the question is _____ (such as the date of the suspect’s sixth birthday), than the material is testimonial and protected by the 5th Amendment.

Answer 8

relevant

Question 9

In United States v Wade (1967), SCOTUS held that compelling the accused to exhibit his person for observation by a prosecutor’s witness prior to trial “involves no compulsion of the accused to give evidence having ‘______ significance.’”

Answer 9

testimonial

Question 10

In US v Wade (1967), the post-indictment lineup was deteremined to be a critical stage of the proceedings if the __-_____ identification of the accused could be jeopardized.

Answer 10

in-court

Question 11

In regards to a post-indictment line-up, SCOTUS held that counsel must be present if what?

Answer 11

requested by the suspect or if counsel has been appointed

Question 12

In Kirby v Illinois (1972), SCOTUS refused to extend the right to counsel protection of the 6th Amendment to a ___-______ identification.

Answer 12

pre-indictment

Question 13

In Foster v California (1969), SCOTUS held that for a lineup to be constitutional, it must not be ______.

Answer 13

suggestive

Question 14

What are five factors that should be considered in evaluating the likelihood of misidentification?

Answer 14

1. witness’s opportunity to view the criminal during the crime;2. witness’s degree of attention3. accuracy of the witness’s prior description of the criminal;4. level of certainty demonstrated by witness at the confrontation; and5. length of time between the crime and confrontation

Question 15

In Neil v Biggers (1972), SCOTUS said that the primary evil to be avoided in lineups is the likelihood of _____ _____.

Answer 15

irreparable misidentification

Question 16

One court held that in determining whether the in-court id is contaminated by pretrial procedures, the court must determine whether the procedure was unnecessarily _____ and mist then weigh the corrupting influence of the suggestive procedure against the _____ of the id itself.

Answer 16

suggestive, reliability

Question 17

One-on-one id’s are generally okay when the accused is apprehended within a relatively ____ period of time and has _____ to the crime scene.

Answer 17

short, returned

Question 18

The use of a show-up (on scene id) of a suspect fin a second crime for identification by a witness in the first crime IS / IS NOT impermissible suggestive?

Answer 18

IS

Question 19

The use of a single photograph was held by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to be suggestive and a denial of ___ _____.

Answer 19

due process

Question 20

In US v Dionisio (1973), SCOTUS held that compelling a suspect to produce voice exemplars DID / DID NOT violate the 5th Amendment against self-incrimination.

Answer 20

DID NOT

Question 21

IN US v Mavia (1990), the court proposed what what 5 safeguards be applied when spectographic analysis is offered?

Answer 21

1. 2 or more minutes of each sample2. a signal-to-noise ratio where the signal is higher than 20 decibels3. frequency of 3000 hertz or better4. example in the same words, same rate, and same way, spoken naturally and fluently5. responsible examiner

Question 22

It IS / IS NOT a violation of the self-incrimination clause to examine a suspect’s body for traces of blood, or to take epidermal scrapings or saliva samples from a suspect.

Answer 22

IS NOT, but 4th Amendment considerations do apply

Question 23

In US v Martinez, the courts established “_____ _____” for the use of DNA profiling in court.

Answer 23

judicial notice

Question 24

The Frye standard, Frye test, or general acceptance test (Frye v US 1923) is a test to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It provides that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only where the technique is generally accepted as what?.

Answer 24

reliable in the relevant scientific community

Question 25

In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993), the Supreme Court held that the Federal Rules of Evidence superseded the ____ standard as the standard for admissibility of expert evidence in federal courts.

Answer 25

Frye

Question 26

If a witness picks out a suspect from a photo lineup, do not tell them that they did or did not pick the suspect. Why?

Answer 26

in-court identification may be compromised