Question 1

D was the driver of a vehicle involved in a fatal accident.At the direction of the police, a doctor drew blood from D without her consent.The blood tested positive for alcohol.At trial the judge should:

A)admit the blood test because of the fatal accident.
B)admit the blood test if the police had probable cause to arrest and search.
C)admit the blood test because drawing blood does not constitute a search.
D)exclude the blood test as compelled self-incrimination.

B

Accepted Answer

The blood test can be admitted if the police had probable cause to arrest and search. This is because the Fourth Amendment allows searches and seizures with probable cause, and drawing blood for a test in the context of a suspected DUI related to a fatal accident can be considered a search incident to a lawful arrest.

Question 2

The doctrine of inevitable discovery allows the court to admit evidence that:&#10;A)was discovered by means independent of the illegal search.&#10;B)would have been discovered by lawful means.&#10;C)was derivative, not primary evidence.&#10;D)is necessary for a determination of factual guilt.

Accepted Answer

The doctrine of inevitable discovery allows the court to admit evidence that would have been discovered by lawful means. This means that even if the evidence was initially obtained through an illegal search, it can still be admitted if it can be established that it would have been discovered through legal means anyway. The key is that the evidence must be independent of the illegal search and seizure. The doctrine of inevitable discovery is a way for the court to uphold the integrity of the legal system and prevent criminals from escaping justice due to technicalities. Thus, choice B is the correct answer. The doctrine of inevitable discovery allows the court to admit evidence that would have been discovered by lawful means. This means that even if the evidence was obtained illegally, if it would have inevitably been discovered through legal means, it can still be admissible in court.

Question 3

Only a person whose rights have been violated may invoke the exclusionary rule.This is known as:&#10;A)standing.&#10;B)immunity.&#10;C)jurisdiction.&#10;D)claim of law.

Accepted Answer

Standing means that a person has the legal right to bring a claim or challenge in court. In the context of the exclusionary rule, a person must have standing to invoke it. This means that they must have had their own rights violated and that the evidence that was obtained as a result of that violation was used against them in court. Only in such circumstances can the exclusionary rule be invoked to exclude the evidence from the trial. The exclusionary rule is a legal doctrine that prohibits evidence obtained in violation of a person's constitutional rights from being used against them in court. However, this rule can only be invoked by a person who has standing, meaning they have a legitimate expectation of privacy that has been infringed upon. In other words, the person must have been directly impacted by the violation of their rights. Therefore, the correct answer is A) standing.

Question 4

Evidence derived from constitutional violations is called:&#10;A)good faith evidence.&#10;B)unethical evidence.&#10;C)silver platter evidence.&#10;D)fruit of the poisonous tree.

Accepted Answer

Evidence derived from constitutional violations is called "fruit of the poisonous tree". This evidence is inadmissible in court and cannot be used against a defendant. Evidence derived from constitutional violations is called "fruit of the poisonous tree." This evidence is not admissible in court because it was obtained illegally, and allowing it to be used as evidence would violate the accused's Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Question 5

Standing to invoke the exclusionary rule requires that:&#10;A)the defendant be harmed by the introduction of the evidence.&#10;B)the defendant was the target of the search for evidence.&#10;C)the defendant's personal right to privacy was violated.&#10;D)there was a trespass upon the defendant's property rights.

Accepted Answer

The exclusionary rule is intended to protect individuals' Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. Therefore, standing requires that the defendant's personal right to privacy was violated.

Question 6

The exclusionary rule applies to:&#10;A)police officials.&#10;B)government agents.&#10;C)private parties acting as government agents.&#10;D)all of the above.

Accepted Answer

The exclusionary rule applies to all government actors, including police officials, government agents, and private parties acting as government agents. It excludes evidence obtained in violation of an individual's Fourth Amendment rights from being used against them in a criminal trial. The exclusionary rule applies to all parties, including police officials, government agents, and private parties acting as government agents. This rule prohibits the use of evidence obtained through unconstitutional searches and seizures from being used in criminal trials.

Question 7

The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule allows the court to admit evidence:&#10;A)offered in good faith by the prosecutor.&#10;B)seized in good faith by the police.&#10;C)seized in good faith by the police who relied on a search warrant.&#10;D)seized in good faith by the police who had probable cause to search.

Accepted Answer

The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule allows evidence that was seized by police officers in good faith and in reliance on a search warrant that is later found to be defective or invalid to be admitted in court. This exception does not apply if the police officers were not acting in good faith, even if they had probable cause to search. Therefore, options A, B, and D are incorrect. The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule allows for evidence to be admitted if it was seized in good faith by the police who relied on a search warrant, even if the warrant is later found to be invalid. This exception does not apply if the police did not rely on the warrant or if the warrant was obtained through deceit or bad faith. Therefore, choices A, B, and D are all incorrect.

Question 8

The exclusionary rule:&#10;A)bans all illegally obtained evidence from all proceedings.&#10;B)limits the prosecutor's but not the jury's use of evidence.&#10;C)does not prevent prosecutors from using illegally seized evidence to impeach the defendant's testimony.&#10;D)bans use of illegally obtained evidence by grand juries.

Accepted Answer

The exclusionary rule does not prevent prosecutors from using illegally seized evidence specifically to impeach the defendant's testimony. This is an exception to the general principle that illegally obtained evidence is inadmissible in court.

Question 9

The prime purpose of the exclusionary rule is:&#10;A)to deter unlawful police conduct.&#10;B)to prevent self-incrimination.&#10;C)to encourage police to obtain search warrants.&#10;D)judicial efficiency.

Accepted Answer

The prime purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter unlawful police conduct. This means that evidence obtained in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights, such as an illegal search or seizure, will be excluded from trial in order to discourage future illegal actions by law enforcement. The exclusionary rule is a key safeguard against violations of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, and serves to protect individuals' privacy rights. The exclusionary rule is designed to deter unlawful police conduct by suppressing evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. It aims to discourage police from engaging in illegal searches and seizures by making evidence obtained through such means inadmissible in court.

Question 10

Derivative evidence may be suppressed when:&#10;A)there is no primary evidence to suppress.&#10;B)the judge's sense of fair play is offended.&#10;C)it was found as a result of a prior illegal search.&#10;D)due process is violated.

Accepted Answer

Derivative evidence may be suppressed if it was found as a result of a prior illegal search, also known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. This is a Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, and excluding derivative evidence obtained from an initial illegal search serves as a deterrent to law enforcement misconduct. The other options do not necessarily apply to derivative evidence specifically. Derivative evidence found as a result of a prior illegal search may be suppressed under the exclusionary rule. This is to deter law enforcement officers from using illegal means to obtain evidence.

Question 11

The Fourth Amendment does not apply to:&#10;A)wiretaps.&#10;B)deceiving individuals into revealing information.&#10;C)electronic eavesdropping.&#10;D)recording conversations.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The Fourth Amendment does not apply to:&#10;A)wiretaps.&#10;B)deceiving...

Question 12

An electronic tracking device:&#10;A)can never intrude upon a recognized right of privacy.&#10;B)always intrudes upon a recognized right of privacy.&#10;C)cannot intrude upon privacy rights in open fields.&#10;D)may intrude upon privacy rights in a dwelling.

Accepted Answer

The answer of An electronic tracking device:&#10;A)can never intrude upon...

Question 13

The exclusionary rule is normally inapplicable:&#10;A)at collateral proceedings not relevant to guilt or innocence.&#10;B)in state courts.&#10;C)to emergency searches.&#10;D)to the investigative stages of the criminal justice system.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The exclusionary rule is normally inapplicable:&#10;A)at collateral...

Question 14

Which of the following is a factor in determining whether evidence should be excluded?&#10;A)The time period between misconduct and acquisition of evidence&#10;B)The seriousness of the charged offense&#10;C)The experience level of the police officer obtaining the evidence&#10;D)The importance of the evidence to the prosecution

Accepted Answer

The answer of Which of the following is a factor...

Deck 11: Government Monitoring of Communications and the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule