criminal procedure add'l cards

Question 1

what is always required to impose the 4th Amendment and a Defendant’s right to challenge it?

Answer 1

requires a government or state action and standing.

Question 2

Define standing

Answer 2

A criminal defendant must have standing to raise a Fourth Amendment violation claim. This is a threshold issue for any criminal defendant seeking to have evidence suppressed under the exclusionary rule.

Question 3

A Defendant challenging an unreasonable search for purposes of the 4th A must have standing and state action. But must thedefendant asserting the Fourth Amendment violation must personally be the victim of the police’s unreasonable conduct?

Answer 3

Yes

Question 4

explain the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine

Answer 4

In addition to excluding all evidence that has been illegally obtained, any additional evidence, including oral statements and physical objects acquired either directly or indirectly from the illegal arrest, search, or seizure, must also be excluded as tainted fruit of the poisonous tree [Wong

Question 5

what are the three levels of encounters with police?

Answer 5

1. mere encounter
2. Reasonable suspicion
3. Probable cause

Question 6

T or F Persons present on the premises during a valid search pursuant to a search warrant may be detained.

Answer 6

True

Question 7

When does a dog sniff violate the 4th amendment?

Answer 7

A dog sniff of the exterior of a lawfully stopped vehicle is a 4th Amendment violation if it extends the purpose of the stop. (for instance, a cop pulls me over for a traffic violation, he cannot make me wait for dogs to come and sniff the outside of the car because it extends beyond the purpose of the stop).

Question 8

A warrant based on an informant’s tip will be issued when probable cause is established under the “totality of the circumstances” [Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983)]. The relevant factors taken into account are:

Answer 8

1) credible information;
2) reliable informant;
3) police corroboration; and
4) declaration against interest.
(c) An informant generally need not reveal his identity

Question 9

T or F If a police officer conducts an illegal search and finds documents linking another person, who does not live in the home, to a crime search, the other person does not have standing to challenge the violation.

Answer 9

True

Question 10

Explain the two required parts of a Terry Stop: Stop and Frisk

Answer 10

Stop- A Terry stop has two parts: the stop and the frisk. For a constitutional stop, an officer must have a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity may be “afoot.”
Frisk- During the course of that stop, if the officer has a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the suspect is armed and dangerous, he may conduct a pat-down frisk search for concealed weapons.

Question 11

T or F a teenager can consent to the search of an entire house even her locked parents bedroom.

Answer 11

False, A teenager can only consent to the search of the common areas of the house, not the private ones within .

Question 12

For third party consent to search a house, what is required?

Answer 12

For third-party consent, joint access and control of the premises is required.

Question 13

explain the inevitable discovery rule and the independent evidence rule as it pertains to the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine

Answer 13

evidence obtained fruit of the poisonous tree may be admitted into evidence if the taint of illegality is purged by the independent evidence rule or the inevitable discovery rule. Specifically, where the tainted evidence in question would have been inevitably discovered regardless of the illegal discovery, it will be admissible under the inevitable discovery rule. Under the independent evidence rule, the illegality is purged when the source of information that revealed the evidence is independent.

Question 14

What are the two situations in which the recent occupant rule can be used to search for contraband in an arrest?

Answer 14

two situations in which the police may search the car of a recent occupant following his arrest:

(1) if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the car; or 
 (2) if the police believe the car contains evidence of the arrest. However, the search of the passenger compartment may only be conducted if they reasonably believe that evidence of the offense for which the defendant has been arrested is in the vehicle.

Question 15

under the common law, was it necessary for D to commit the last act necessary to achieve the intended result?

Answer 15

Yes Under common law, it was necessary that the party commit the “last act” necessary to achieve the intended result;

Question 16

At common law, what did “breaking” (part of burglary) mean?

At common law if the D enters an open door or window, would this be considered a breaking under the common law?

Is “breaking” still a required element in all states for burglary? Explain

Answer 16

“breaking” meant that the defendant created a breach or opening;

No it would not be considered a breaking if the defendant merely took advantage of an opening left by the occupants, such as an unlocked, ajar door or window, there was no “breaking.”

No, Many states have eliminated the breaking element entirely and regard any trespassory entry as sufficient to support a burglary conviction,

Question 17

Police may not cross the threshold of a third party’s residence to execute a valid arrest warrant unless the police —

Answer 17

unless the police first obtain a search warrant authorizing the entry into the residence or there are otherwise exigent circumstances that permit a warrantless entry.

Question 18

what is an independent intervening cause (to be considered in criminal acts)

Answer 18

An independent intervening cause is one that would have occurred regardless of the defendant’s act.

Question 19

Hypothetical: the driver (in custody) agreed to make an oral statement but refused to give a written statement unless counsel was present. Is this a sufficient example of a clear request for an attorney?

Answer 19

No

Question 20

T or F At common law, conviction of a principal was required for the conviction of an accomplice

Answer 20

True

Question 21

T or F a defendant may simply choose to present no defense and if the state has not met its burden of proof, the defendant must be found not guilty.

Answer 21

True

Question 22

A defendant who is being sentenced within the presumptive range, even at the highest end of it, does not have the right to have?

T or F a judge may rely on hearsay in sentencing hearings.

Answer 22

have aggravating factors presented to a jury.

True