Deck 5: Exclusionary Rule

Question 1

The U.S. Supreme Court did not adopt a federal exclusionary rule for evidence until after the Mapp v. Ohio decision.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

The Supreme Court has indicated that it would mechanically apply the exclusionary rule to every item of evidence that has a causal connection with police misconduct.

Answer 2

False

Question 3

A defendant may claim benefit of the exclusionary rule based on the introduction of evidence procured through an illegal search and seizure of a third person's property or premises.

Answer 3

False

Question 4

When a police officer makes a traffic stop, the driver of the car is seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.

Question 5

Defendant, as the owner of a residence, will have standing to object to any unlawful search and seizure on his residence even when he is not present at the time of the search.

Question 6

Evidence is considered as fruit of the poisonous tree simply because it would not have come to light but for the illegal actions of the police.

Question 7

United States v. Leon case applied the purged taint exception to the exclusionary rule.

Question 8

The independent source exception is based on the concept that even if the police obtained the evidence by conduct that violated the defendant's constitutional rights, they could have obtained the evidence from a source that was not connected to the illegal actions.

Question 9

As a rule, the exclusionary rule has been applied to most noncriminal trial proceedings.

Question 10

In forfeitures procedures incurred by the commission of offenses against the law the courts will treat those proceedings as criminal proceedings for all the purposes of the determining if the exclusionary rule applies.

Question 11

The Supreme Court has held that the exclusionary rule does not apply to deportation hearing.

Question 12

The exclusionary rule does apply to parole revocation hearings where the evidence was obtained in violation of such Fourth Amendment rights of parolees.

Question 13

In Hudson v. Michigan, the Supreme Court applied the exclusionary rule to exclude the evidence because the law enforcement officers did not announce their presence and provide residents an opportunity to open the door.

Question 14

Testimony from a witness can at times constitute a tainted fruit of the poisonous tree.

Question 15

In which of the below listed cases did the U.S. Supreme Court adopted the federal exclusionary rule for evidence that was unlawfully seized from a home without a warrant in violation of the Fourth Amendment?

A) Hudson v. Michigan
B) Mapp v. Ohio
C) Weeks v. United States
D) United States v. Leon

Question 16

In which of the below listed cases did the U.S. Supreme Court discuss the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule?

A) Hudson v. Michigan
B) Mapp v. Ohio
C) Weeks v. United States
D) United States v. Leon

Question 17

In which of the below listed cases did the U.S. Supreme Court discuss the requirement of the police's violation of the knock and announce requirement?

A) Hudson v. Michigan
B) Mapp v. Ohio
C) Weeks v. United States
D) United States v. Leon

Question 18

The evidence against the defendant was discovered based on information taken from his statement that was taken in violation of his Miranda rights. Later another person gave the police the same information. What should the prosecution argue to prevent the court from excluding the evidence?

A) The questioning was based on a good faith mistake.
B) The statement should be admitted based on the purged taint exception.
C) The statement should be admitted based on the inevitable discovery exception.
D) The police did not commit any misconduct.

Question 19

In which of the below hearings is the exclusionary rule likely to be applied to exclude evidence obtained as the results of an illegal search?

A) civil tax case
B) civil forfeiture action in a court designed to cause the forfeiture of property used in a criminal activity
C) deportation hearing
D) probation revocation hearing

Question 20

In Hudson v. Michigan, the Supreme Court held:

A) The exclusionary rule was applicable because the magistrate made the error.
B) The police did not violate the knock and announce rule.
C) The police did violate the knock and announce rule.
D) The exclusionary rule did not apply to parole revocation hearings.

Question 21

The Supreme Court in Arizona v. Evans, (1995) held that the exclusionary rule

A) required the suppression of the evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment where the search was based on erroneous information.
B) required the suppression of the evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment where the search was based police mistakes.
C) did not require the suppression of the evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment where the search was based clerical errors by court employees.
D) required the suppression of the evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment where the search was based clerical errors by court employees.

Question 22

The Supreme Court has held that a court's decision regarding the possible attenuation of taint as to witness testimony should be based on:

A) the witness' willingness to testify
B) the role played by the illegality
C) the proximity between the illegal behavior and the testimony
D) the police's motivation
E) All the above factors.

Question 23

The U.S. Supreme Court has clearly indicated their reluctance to use the exclusionary rule in cases

A) involving the Fourth Amendment.
B) involving the Fifth Amendment.
C) involving the Sixth Amendment.
D) involving the Eighth Amendment.

Question 24

If a federal agent searches a private residence pursuant to a defective search warrant the agent may be liable in civil court for damages if

A) the search warrant fails to describe with particularity the place to be searched and the items to be seized.
B) contains numerous misspellings.
C) contains technical errors.
D) In all the above situations, the agent may be liable in civil court.

Question 25

What factors does the Supreme Court use to determine whether the exclusionary rule will be invoked?

Question 26

How do the courts handle the situations involving mistakes in warrants in determining whether to invoke the exclusionary rule?

Question 27

What does a court consider in deciding regarding the possible attenuation of taint as to witness testimony?

Question 28

Under what circumstances may a prosecutor use a statement taken from a defendant in violation of her Miranda rights in a court case?