Crim Pro MCQ Rules 1

Question 1

The 4th amendment gives protection against who?

Answer 1

The Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures applies only to government actors. This includes government employees as well as private persons working on the government’s behalf or otherwise acting as an “instrument or agent of the government.”
HOWEVER, a private individual acting on his/her own behalf without the government’s knowledge or participation (e.g., concerned citizen, vigilante) is not a government actor.

Question 2

When does the D have standing for a motion to suppress?

Answer 2

Standing exists when the defendant has a legitimate expectation of privacy (or an ownership/possessory interest) in the area or item searched at the time of the search.
Therefore, a defendant cannot challenge an unlawful search of a third party’s premises because it infringed upon the third party’s right to privacy—not the defendant’s.

Question 3

What is authorized by an arrest warrant?

Answer 3

Authorizes police to take person into custody. Additionally, an arrest warrant implicitly authorizes entry into the arrestee’s home to serve the warrant if police have reason to believe that the arrestee is present

Question 4

Police may only search for an arrestee in a third party’s home when they have:

Answer 4

1. A warrant authorizing the search
2. Exigent circumstances or
3. The third party’s consent to enter the home.

If none of the above requirements are met, then the exclusionary rule requires the suppression of any evidence obtained as a result of the unlawful search.

Question 5

What are the requirements of a warrant?

Answer 5

1. Based on probable cause
2. Supported by oath or affidavit
3. Issued by neutral & detached magistrate
4. Particularly describes place to be searched/items to be seized

Question 6

What are supporting facts of Probable Cause to get a warrant?

Answer 6

1. Officer’s personal observations
2. Information from reliable, known informant or verified unknown informant
3. Evidence seized during stop and based on reasonable suspicion, discovered in plain view, or during consensual search

Question 7

What are the exceptions to the warrant requirement?

Answer 7

Mnemonic: SAD SPACES
1. Search incident to arrest
2. Administrative search
3.Stop and frisk
4. Plain view
5. Automobile exception
6. Consent
7. Exigent circumstance
8. Special government purpose

Question 8

What is allowed by a search incident to arrest as an exception to the warrant requirement?

Answer 8

This exception allows police to conduct a warrantless search of a person who has been lawfully arrested and the immediate surrounding areas for concealed weapons or destructible evidence.

Question 9

What is the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement?

Answer 9

Under this exception police may act without a warrant when there is an immediate threat of harm to police or the public. It allows police to conduct a protective sweep to search for injured persons and continued threats. They also can seize illegal items that are in plain view. But once the emergency ends, the search must end unless the police obtain a warrant or another exception applies.

Question 10

When does the automobile exception to the warrant requirement justify the warrantless search of a person’s vehicle?

Answer 10

The automobile exception to the warrant requirement allows police to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle if they have probable cause to believe it contains evidence of a crime. Officers can search any area within the vehicle where the evidence might be located, including the trunk and locked containers.

Question 11

Is a warrantless search pursuant to the automobile exception to the warrant requirement limited to the areas of the vehicle that the driver can access?

Answer 11

NO.

Note: This limitation is present only when there is a search incident to a lawful arrest

Question 12

Who is protected by the 5th amendment privilege against self incrimination?

Answer 12

The privilege against self-incrimination applies only to individuals—not corporations.

Question 13

What should be done if there is a stop of long duration during interrogation of a suspect who has waived Miranda rights?

Answer 13

If the interrogation of a suspect who has waived his/her Miranda rights is stopped for a long duration, police should re-Mirandize the suspect prior to resuming the interrogation.

Question 14

What are the Miranda warnings?

Answer 14

Before custodial interrogation, police must inform suspects that:

1. They have the right to remain silent
2. Anything they say can be used against them at trial
3. They have the right to an attorney prior to & during questioning
4. If they cannot afford an attorney, the state will appoint one

*Note: These do not have to be given verbatim but should contain a statement as to the essence of each of these warnings

Question 15

Are police allowed to lie to a suspect to obtain incriminating info?

Answer 15

YES. (E.g. Colander attached to printer as “lied detector helmet”)

Question 16

When is the 5th amendment right to counsel applicable?

Answer 16

The Fifth Amendment right to counsel applies to custodial interrogations prior to the commencement of judicial proceedings. It must be invoked by a specific, unambiguous request

Question 17

When if the 6th amendment right to counsel applicable?

Answer 17

The Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches automatically upon the commencement of judicial proceedings and applies at all critical stages of prosecution. However, this right applies only to the specific offense(s) at issue in those proceedings—not to other crimes in which judicial proceedings have yet to commence.

Question 18

What is the applicability of the Blockburger Test under the 6th amendment?

Answer 18

Two different crimes in one criminal transaction deemed to be same offense unless each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not.
E.g., Arson & Theft/Larceny (two distinct offenses)
E.g., Robbery & Larceny (Same offense)

Question 19

Is a prosecutor required to produce exculpatory evidence in favor of the D in a grand jury proceeding?

Answer 19

NO. A prosecutor is not required to present exculpatory evidence to a grand jury.

That is because the grand jury’s function is merely to determine whether enough evidence exists to bring a criminal charge—not to determine guilt or innocence. Accordingly, the grand jury need only hear evidence that supports the prosecutor’s side.

Question 20

What is a peremptory challenge?

Answer 20

A peremptory challenge is an objection to a potential juror that can be raised without any reason or explanation during the jury-selection process.

Question 21

Which are not valid basis for peremptory challenges?

Answer 21

The Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause prohibits striking potential jurors based solely on their race, ethnicity, or sex.

Question 22

What is the three prong test to determine whether a use of peremptory challenge was discriminatory?

Answer 22

That test employs the following burden-shifting scheme:

1. The moving party must establish a prima facie case of discrimination (e.g., the prosecution used peremptory challenges to strike only nonwhite jurors).
2. The party who exercised the peremptory challenge must then provide a neutral reason for the peremptory challenge (e.g., the strikes were based on age, not race).
3. If it does so, then the burden shifts back to the moving party to prove that the other party’s reason was pretextual (e.g., the prosecution struck a 21-year-old black man but not a 21-year-old white man).

Question 23

When is physical evidence as a result of a non-Mirandized statement admissible?

Answer 23

Physical evidence obtained as a result of a non-Mirandized statement is admissible so long as that statement was voluntary (i.e., not coerced). A statement was coerced if it was the product of physical force, threats, or psychological pressure by police.

Question 24

Does application of “three strikes laws” violate double jeopardy or cruel and unusual punishment?

Answer 24

NO.
Applying a “three-strikes” law to impose lengthy imprisonment upon the commission of a third felony does not violate the prohibition against double jeopardy or cruel and unusual punishment.