Exam 4: The Rule of Law

The Supreme Court has ruled that warrantless searches of a home, even when a co-habitant consents to the search, are prohibited if the other co-habitant is physically present and objects to the search.

The Supreme Court has held that the police cannot attach a GPS (global-positioning system) device to the bumper of a suspect's automobile to track his or her movements for nearly a month without a valid warrant.

The Supreme Court has held that violation of the "knock-and-announce rule" does not require suppression of evidence found in a search if the interests violated had nothing to do with the seizure of evidence.

The Supreme Court has recently extended the right to the effective assistance of counsel to plea bargains that lapse or are rejected.

The Supreme Court has ruled that an expert witness is allowed to discuss others' testimonial statements, even without first-hand knowledge of the facts on which the statements are based, as long as those facts themselves are not admitted as evidence.

There has been much controversy surrounding the USA PATRIOT Act and the FISA court. Discuss this controversy, and note where the legislation now stands.

In 2009, what case qualified the earlier New York v. Belton Court decision on conducting searches in passenger compartments of cars only when it is reasonable to believe the arrestee could still have access to the vehicle at the time of the search?

Which of the following government actions is similar to bills of attainder?

Which of the following standards of proof is required for a judicial officer to deny bail in cases involving capital felonies?

Which of the following is NOT a provision of the USA PATRIOT Act?

Robert has been arrested for three counts of passing checks with insufficient funds, with amounts that were collectively a misdemeanor in his city of residence. If he is found guilty, Robert could serve five and a half months in jail. He has been reading the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and feels that he should be entitled to an attorney. He also believes, however, that he can represent himself if he goes to trial. He wants to move any trial to another city because he has made the headlines already when he ran for office. If he is convicted, he plans to claim that he had ineffective assistance of counsel, because, after all, he is not an attorney. He wants to have a jury trial and bring in witnesses that can state he broke his hand and therefore could not be the individual who wrote the checks. What constitutional amendments will be considered and what will the results likely be?

Police suspect that Lucy is trafficking marijuana from her third-floor apartment. Officers on the bicycle path have observed for several days a suspicious plant basking in the sunlight of Lucy's third-floor balcony. Officers have confirmed through their liaison with apartment management that Lucy is a legal tenant of the apartment. In addition to the plant, officers have also observed that a number of visitors knock on Lucy's door, shake hands with her, and leave with a small brown package. These officers are trained in drug and narcotics identification and believe that Lucy's plant and apartment activity are consistent with those of a drug trafficker. What should the officers do?

E-mail has the same privacy protections as does regular mail.

From 1973 through 2012, how many inmates have been freed from death row because of problems or errors in the legal process?

There are at least three different reasons that the U.S. Supreme Court did not make the Fourteenth Amendment incorporate the Bill of Rights for approximately 100 years. Which of the following is NOT one of the reasons given in your textbook?

Under the USA PATRIOT Act, the FBI may now search private records (financial, medical, library, student-any recorded activity) without a warrant and probable cause and without having to reveal to anyone what it has done. This is referred to as what type of search?

At 2 AM, Lynette and Jason had left a party where they both had several beers. Lynette decided she was less intoxicated than Jason, so she took the keys and began driving home. As Lynette was driving on the interstate, she didn't realize her headlights were off. A state trooper observed Lynette's car without its lights on and signaled her to pull over. Lynette pulled the car over successfully and as her alcohol effects kicked in, she started laughing uncontrollably. The state trooper asked both Lynette and Jason to exit the car. Lynette, who continued to laugh, failed a field sobriety test, and the officer arrested Lynette for driving under the influence. The officer then searched the car and found empty beer bottles under Jason's seat, even though Jason did not consent to a search. Lynette subsequently refused a breathalyzer test and was brought to court for driving under the influence. She wants her lawyer to challenge the officer's search of the car because Jason did not consent to his area being searched. Will she be successful? Why or why not?

An arrest warrant is issued only if substantial and trustworthy evidence supports which two conclusions?

The Supreme Court has ruled that the only exceptions to a defendant's right to confront and cross-examine witnesses about testimonial evidence are those that were recognized at the nation's founding: (1) declarations made by a speaker who was both on the brink of death and aware that he or she was dying, and (2) when the defendant engaged in conduct designed to prevent the witness from testifying.