Deck 8: Opposing Partys Statements Admissionsand Confessions

Question 1

"Interrogation" as used in Miranda refers to ONLY express questioning.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

Under the FRE,any statement made by a party is an opposing party's statement (admissions)and can be used in evidence against him or her as long as the statement is relevant to the case.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is applicable to the states via the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

A confession is said to be coerced,only when the defendant has been subjected to physical abuse.

Question 5

Miranda requirements are imposed whenever there is a custodial interrogation.

Question 6

The McNabb-Mallory rule (prompt arraignment rule)is no longer good law.

Question 7

The Miranda requirements are triggered whenever the defendant is the focus of the investigation.

Question 8

The fact that a suspect is questioned in a police station does not necessarily mean that he or she is in custody for the purposes of Miranda.

Question 9

The U.S.Constitution requires that Miranda's procedures be followed.

Question 10

An opposing party's statement (admissions)is always an acknowledgment of guilt.

Question 11

A defendant's silence while in police custody is usually not an opposing party's statement (admissions).

Question 12

Any amount of deception in the form of a ploy to get a suspect to make statements has been held by the United States Supreme Court to amount to coercion and hence in violation of either due process or Miranda.

Question 13

In order for a defendant to claim that a confession was involuntarily given,there MUST be some action by a federal or state agent.

Question 14

Once the accused invokes his right to remain silent,the police may not resume questioning,unless the accused himself initiates further communication,exchanges,or conversations with the police.

Question 15

In the Miranda decision,the Supreme Court stated that the defendant bears the burden of proving that his or her waiver was not made voluntarily,knowingly,or intelligently.

Question 16

Under the FRE,any statement by a party is an opposing party's statement (admissions)and can always be used in evidence against him or her.

Question 17

Opposing party's statements (admissions)are limited to verbal statements.

Question 18

For the purposes of Miranda,"custody" means a mere a stop of a suspect.

Question 19

A defendant's silence is NEVER an opposing party's statement (admissions).

Question 20

Once the accused invokes his right to counsel,the police cannot further interrogate the suspect,unless the accused himself initiates further communication,exchanges,or conversations with the police.

Question 21

The Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches when adversary judicial proceedings have commenced in a criminal case.

Question 22

The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is applicable to all violations of Miranda.

Question 23

For a confession to be admissible it must be in writing,or be available on audio or video.

Question 24

A confession cannot be a simple "yes" or "no" answer to a question.

Question 25

The test for voluntariness,according to the United States Supreme Court is:

A)Miranda
B)McNabb-Mallory Rule
C)Prompt Arraignment Rule
D)Totality of Circumstances

Question 26

A defendant's statement while in police custody is admissible unless

A)the prosecution proves that the statement was made voluntarily.
B)the prosecution proves that specific rights were waived before the statement was made.
C)the prosecution proves both (a.and (b.
D)a defendant's statement while in police custody is always admissible.

Question 27

In all jurisdictions,if the judge decides that the confession is voluntary,the judge instructs the jury on the definition of voluntariness and instructs the jury to consider the confession as evidence only if it finds that the confession was voluntary.

Question 28

If a statement obtained in violation of Miranda leads to the discovery of other evidence,that derivative fruit of the poisonous tree is NOT barred by the exclusionary rule applied to Miranda.

Question 29

If the appellate court concludes from the record of the case that the confession was improperly obtained,the conviction will always be reversed.

Question 30

The Sixth Amendment prohibits deliberately eliciting statements after counsel has been obtained.

Question 31

Which of the following is NOT a reason for excluding the use of coerced confessions?

A)Coerced confessions are unreliable.
B)The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution explicitly provides for the exclusion of coerced confessions.
C)The American criminal justice system is accusatorial,not inquisitorial.
D)The exclusion from evidence of a coerced confession arguably will effectively deter police misconduct.

Question 32

The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the confession was properly obtained.

Question 33

Which one of the following statements CANNOT be an opposing party's statement (admissions)?

A)I was at the crime scene.
B)I knew the victim of the crime.
C)I was not at the crime scene.
D)I wiped my fingerprints off the gun found at the scene of the crime.

Question 34

The Fifth Amendment,the Sixth Amendment,and decisions such as Miranda,have basically eradicated the use of confessions in law enforcement.

Question 35

A Miranda violation is NOT a constitutional violation.

Question 36

The United States Supreme Court has long excluded confessions obtained through the use of violence or inhumane treatment of the accused for the following reason(s)

A)The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
B)The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
C)The Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
D)All of the above.
E)For the reasons mentioned in a.and b.above.

Question 37

A statement obtained in violation of Miranda can be used to impeach the defendant's testimony.

Question 38

The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the right to counsel attaches when there is a custodial interrogation.

Question 39

If a violation of Miranda is deliberate,any subsequent statement taken after giving the proper warnings is admissible,provided the police take "curative measures" before the later statement is made.

Question 40

If the defendant is convicted and he or she appeals,the appellate court is barred from reviewing the voluntariness of a confession because that is a question of fact for the jury.

Question 41

Miranda requires the police to warn a suspect in custody of what rights?

Question 42

A confession of one defendant,implicating a co-defendant is generally inadmissible because of the mandates of the

A)Fifth Amendment self-incrimination clause.
B)Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause.
C)Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.
D)All of the above.

Question 43

A Miranda violation is a violation of the

A)Right to privacy.
B)Right to counsel.
C)Fifth or Fourteenth Amendment.
D)None of the above.

Question 44

Joe was arrested,for drunk driving,by an officer of the Los Angeles Police Department.Neither the arresting officer nor anyone at the police station read him his rights.Nevertheless,the investigating officer asked him his name,age,address,and place of birth.The only thing that Joe remembered and was able to communicate to the investigating officer was his name.At trial the prosecution sought to introduce this fact as evidence that Joe's mental faculties were impaired.The evidence will probably be

A)admissible,because the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is inapplicable to Miranda violations.
B)admissible,because Joe's situation falls within an exception to Miranda.
C)inadmissible,because this is exactly the type of situation which Miranda is designed to protect.
D)inadmissible,because someone who is seriously impaired cannot knowingly,intelligently,and voluntarily waive his rights.

Question 45

Which one of the following is a jury question? Questions relating to the admissibility of incriminating statements under

A)the Miranda decision.
B)the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
C)the Fourth Amendment search and seizure.
D)All of the above.
E)None of the above.

Question 46

In Dickerson,the Court affirmed:

A)that confessions cannot be physically coerced
B)Miranda's constitutional base
C)what constitutes interrogation for purposes on Miranda
D)the impeachment exception to the rule that excludes statements taken in violation of Miranda

Question 47

List the exceptions to Miranda.

Question 48

This doctrine holds that if evidence resulting from illegal police conduct is sufficiently removed from the primary illegality,the evidence need not be excluded.

A)fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine
B)attenuation doctrine
C)unreliability doctrine
D)There is no such doctrine.

Question 49

Joe was arrested by an officer of the Los Angeles Police Department.He was read his rights and taken to the police station.At the police station he called his attorney.His attorney advised him not to say anything until he was present.Joe told the investigating officer that he wasn't going to say anything until his attorney was present.The officer ignored what Joe said and continued questioning him.During which Joe made some incriminating statements.At Joe's trial,the evidence will probably be excluded on the following ground:

A)The Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel.
B)The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
C)The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
D)Miranda.

Question 50

The states follow one of two procedures to determine whether a confession was freely and voluntarily made.Explain each.

Question 51

Jill was found stabbed to death.Given the history of domestic abuse,the police suspected Jack (Jill's husband).After having been read his rights,Jack waived his rights and told the officers that he wanted to cooperate.Officer Jones,with knowledge that Jack was uneducated and not very smart,told jack: "Don't worry about a thing.When a person dies,the last thing that she sees becomes frozen onto her retina.With the new technology that we have we can easily find out who was the person that stabbed your wife by simply developing the image on her retina as if it was a film." Jack,fearing that the image was going to be his,confessed.At his trial,Jack's confession will probably be

A)excluded because it is coerced.
B)admitted because deception is not necessarily coercion.
C)excluded because Jack's Fifth Amendment rights were violated.
D)admitted because deception,even an outright lie,is always permissible.

Question 52

What is the difference,if any,between the Sixth Amendment and the Miranda right to counsel?

Question 53

A confession of one defendant,implicating a co-defendant is generally inadmissible.Explain why these confessions are inadmissible,and give some of the suggested procedures for overcoming this problem.

Question 54

Most departments issue credit card-sized Miranda cards that list the rights that must be read to and waived by the suspect before questioning may begin.Why is this practice a good idea?

Question 55

What constitutes deliberate elicitation? What constitutes a custodial interrogation?

Question 56

What is the test for "custody"?

Question 57

What is the difference between a confession and an opposing party's statement (admissions)?

Question 58

If a person,subjected to an unlawful search and seizure,makes incriminating statements,those statements are inadmissible under the exclusionary rule of

A)the Fourth Amendment.
B)the Due Process Clause.
C)Miranda.
D)the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
E)All of the above.

Question 59

In Illinois v.Perkins,a prison inmate told the police he had learned about a homicide from a fellow inmate.The police recognized the description of the homicide as possibly being one under investigation.Consequently,the police placed an undercover agent in the cellblock with the informant and the defendant.The defendant was being held at that time for another crime unrelated to the homicide.The undercover officer engaged the defendant in a conversation about the killing and asked the defendant if he had ever "done" anybody.The officer did not give the defendant Miranda warnings before the conversation.The Supreme Court of the United States held

A)that the statements were admissible and did not violate the requirements of Miranda.
B)that the statements were inadmissible and did violate the requirements of Miranda.
C)that the statements were inadmissible and did violate the Fifth Amendment.
D)that the statements were admissible and did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

Question 60

The Supreme Court of the United States has created three exceptions to the requirement that a police officer give a suspect in custody Miranda warnings before interrogating him or her.Which one of the following is NOT an exception?

A)the exigent circumstances exception.
B)the public safety exception.
C)the routine booking exception.
D)the undercover police questioner exception.

Question 61

Explain the effect of the 2004 Supreme Court decision in United States v.Patane in connection with the exclusionary rule and Miranda.

Question 62

What is an adoptive opposing party's statement (admissions)?

Question 63

Ever since the Miranda decision,there has been debate about whether Miranda's warnings are constitutionally mandated.How has the Supreme Court addressed that issue in recent years?