Session 7 Flashcards
Roger, who is a police officer looks the other way while Tondelayo commits a crime and is paid $200.00 for his actions. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Grand Larceny in the second degree.
B: Official Misconduct.
C: Petit Larceny.
D: Grand Larceny in the fourth degree.
B: Official Misconduct.
See PL 195.00
Officer Smith intentionally fails to arraign a defendant in a timely manner in violation of the Criminal Procedure Law. Officer Smith committed the offense of:
A: Obstructing Governmental Administration in the second degree.
B: Official Misconduct.
C: Harassment in the second degree.
D: Harassment in the first degree.
B: Official Misconduct.
See PL 195.00
Roger offers to give Mayor Thomas two hundred dollars to vote for his building proposal. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Bribery in the third degree.
B: Official Misconduct.
C: Bribery in the second degree.
D: Bribery in the first degree.
A: Bribery in the third degree.
See PL 200.00
Roger offers to give Trustee Jones six thousand dollars to vote in favor of his building permit. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Bribery in the second degree.
B: Bribery in the first degree.
C: Official Misconduct.
D: Bribery in the third degree.
A: Bribery in the second degree.
See PL 200.03
Roger, who is a prisoner at the County Jail, fails to return to the County Jail after being temporarily released for a work detail. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Escape in the third degree.
B: Absconding from Temporary Release in the second degree.
C: Escape in the first degree.
D: Escape in the second degree.
Absconding from Temporary Release in the second degree
B: See PL 205.16
Roger who was arrested for a class C felony, escapes from custody from the police station. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Escape in the third degree.
B: Absconding from Temporary Release in the second degree.
C: Escape in the second degree.
D: Escape in the first degree.
C: Escape in the second degree.
Escape, charged with a C Felony
Roger, who was convicted of a felony, escaped from the County Jail. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Escape in the second degree.
B: Resisting Arrest.
C: Escape in the first degree.
D: Escape in the third degree.
C: Escape in the first degree.
Escape from a detention facility after conviction of a felony
Roger lies on a signed Supporting Deposition that he submitted to Officer Jones as part of a criminal investigation. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Obstructing Governmental Administration in the second degree.
B: Perjury in the second degree.
C: Perjury in the third degree.
D: Making an Apparently Sworn False Statement in the first degree.
B: Perjury in the second degree.
Making a false statement to a public servant. See, PL 210.10
Roger knowingly makes a false statement while testifying at a trial for Tondelayo while under oath. The testimony directly effects Tondelayo’s trial. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Making an Apparently Sworn False Statement in the second degree.
B: Perjury in the third degree.
C: Perjury in the first degree.
D: Obstructing Governmental Administration in the second degree.
C: Perjury in the first degree.
See PL 210.15
Roger tells Tondelayo that if she shows up to Court to testify at Roger’s brother’s trial, Roger will hurt Tondelayo. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Tampering with a Witness in the third degree.
B: Tampering with a Witness in the first degree.
C: Assault in the second degree.
D: Disorderly Conduct.
A: Tampering with a Witness in the third degree.
Instill fear not to testify, See PL 215.11
Roger becomes disorderly, loud and disruptive in a court room while Court is in session. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Criminal Contempt in the second degree.
B: Disorderly Conduct.
C: Obstructing Governmental Administration in the second degree.
D: Assault in the third degree.
A: Criminal Contempt in the second degree.
While Court is sitting, act disorderly
Roger unlawfully refuses to be sworn as a witness before a Grand Jury. Roger committed the offense of:
A: Obstructing Governmental Administration in the second degree.
B: Criminal Contempt in the first degree.
C: Criminal Contempt in the second degree.
D: Disorderly Conduct.
B: Criminal Contempt in the first degree. E Felony
See PL 215.51, subd. A
Detective Mullins arrested one John Roberts for rape and murder. At the time of arrest Roberts was functionally illiterate, borderline mentally retarded, and suffering from organic brain damage as a result of a childhood injury. Detective Mullins, who had been advised that Roberts was “slow” not only read Miranda warnings to Roberts but also explained each warning in simpler language and in more detail. Mullins also verified that Roberts understood each warning before moving on to the next.
The statements by Roberts will be
A: Admitted because although a suspect must be appraised of his rights, providing a general legal education is not the business of the court.
B: Not be admitted because the interrogation of a person who is known to be suffering from a diminished mental capacity cannot be undertaken absent rational advice from a neutral and/or legally sophisticated person.
A: Admitted because although a suspect must be appraised of his rights, providing a general legal education is not the business of the court.
Same rule for juveniles.
Which of the following statements re: searches is incorrect?
A: If officers have time to get a Search Warrant and they fail to do so, this, in and of itself, will result in the suppression of incriminating evidence.
B: At a suppression hearing, the burden is on the prosecution to show that there was CONSENT to a search.
C: If the information contained in a Search Warrant affidavit is NOT sworn to under oath, it is a fatal defect that will result in suppression of the evidence at a suppression hearing.
D: A search incident to a lawful arrest is limited in both area and time.
A: If officers have time to get a Search Warrant and they fail to do so, this, in and of itself, will result in the suppression of incriminating evidence.
Remember, you SHOULD get a warrant whenever you have the grounds and the time. But, it is not always absolutely necessary.
You are investigating a serious crime, and as part of your duties, you have set up a crime scene. You deem it necessary to search this crime scene for evidence. The scene is the bedroom of a private house where the victim lived with his family. For you to search this crime scene without a warrant would be
A: Proper; when a serious crime has been committed, the emergency nature of the situation permits a warrantless search.
B: Improper; except under certain special circumstances, a crime scene search without a warrant is not authorized.
C: Proper; it has long been an accepted facet that the search of a crime scene is not unreasonable.
D: Improper; in all situations where a crime scene is to be searched, a Search Warrant is required.
B: Improper; except under certain special circumstances, a crime scene search without a warrant is not authorized.
Crime scene searches without a warrant are justified:
1. in an emergency
2. when the contraband is in plain view
3. when the crime scene is a public place
4. when the crime is a homicide, and the victim is the sole occupant of the place to be searched.
The statement below which is inaccurate is:
A: It is a good practice to have a Search Warrant directed to a group or a class of police officers rather than to a particular individual police officer.
B: Once all the evidence which is described as the subject of a Search Warrant has been found, the search must end.
C: A threat by a police officer that he will get a Search Warrant will invalidate a consent search which follows such a threat.
D: Courts have held that it is not a “search” to observe that which is open to view.
C: A threat by a police officer that he will get a Search Warrant will invalidate a consent search which follows such a threat.
A mere threat to get a warrant will NOT invalidate consent that follows.
The least accurate of the following statements is:
A: As a general rule, a search should precede an arrest upon which it is based.
B: The case of Wolf v. Colorado was overruled by Mapp v. Ohio.
C: A search is said to be clearly unreasonable when it is merely “exploratory and general and made solely to find evidence of guilt.”
D: Consent to a search is not considered as voluntary when a citizen complies with the command of an officer pretending to act within his official capacity.
A: As a general rule, a search should precede an arrest upon which it is based.
The arrest should precede the search.