Question 1

Although the intent of the Constitution is to prevent the government from intruding on people's lives when they have done nothing wrong, this freedom (as with all constitutional rights) is not absolute.

Accepted Answer

Constitutional rights have limitations and are subject to restrictions in certain circumstances, such as cases of national security or public safety. The government can also impose reasonable limitations on certain rights in order to protect the greater good, as long as those limitations do not violate the core principles of the Constitution.

Question 2

The exception to the exclusionary rule that deems evidence admissible, even if seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment, when it can be shown that the evidence would have been discovered through lawful means is the:

Accepted Answer

The exception described in the question is the inevitable discovery doctrine. This doctrine holds that evidence that was illegally obtained may still be admissible if it can be shown that the evidence would have been discovered anyway through lawful means. This exception is intended to prevent the exclusionary rule from being used to suppress evidence that would have been found regardless of any Fourth Amendment violation. The other options (harmless error, good faith, and independent source doctrines) are all separate exceptions to the exclusionary rule with different requirements and criteria for admissibility.

Question 3

The Constitution does not provide an absolute right to be free from government intrusion, only from unreasonable interference.

Accepted Answer

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, but it does not provide an absolute right to be free from all government intrusion. Reasonable government interference, such as for law enforcement purposes, can be allowed under certain circumstances.

Question 4

Government agents who have probable cause for believing that evidence of a crime is located at a specific place or that an individual is involved in a crime must go before a neutral and detached magistrate and swear under oath as to who or what they are looking for and where they think it can be found.

Accepted Answer

This is a requirement of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, known as the warrant clause. It helps protect citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by ensuring that government agents have a specific reason and justification for entering private property or conducting a search.

Question 5

In Murray v. United States (1988), the Court held that evidence initially seen during an illegal search, but later recovered under a valid warrant, would be inadmissible because of the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.

Accepted Answer

In Murray v. United States (1988), the Supreme Court held that evidence initially seen during an illegal entry but later recovered independently under a valid search warrant was admissible, as the warrant was not based on the observations made during the illegal entry.

Question 6

The Court has held that because a stop is considered an arrest, Miranda warnings must be given.

Accepted Answer

A stop is not considered an arrest, so Miranda warnings are not required. However, if a stop escalates into an arrest, then Miranda warnings must be given.

Question 7

If evidence that might otherwise fall victim to the exclusionary rule is obtained from a valid, independent source, that evidence can be admitted.

Accepted Answer

This is known as the independent source doctrine, in which evidence obtained from a source unaffected by any illegal police conduct may be admitted, even if similar evidence was obtained illegally.

Question 8

In Rochin v. California, the Supreme Court held that searches that_______________are a violation of due process, and any evidence so obtained will, therefore, be inadmissible.

Accepted Answer

In Rochin v. California, the Supreme Court held that searches that "shock the conscience" are a violation of due process, and any evidence obtained in such a search is therefore inadmissible.

Question 9

The exclusionary rule is by far the most frequently used means to address constitutional infractions by the government in criminal cases.

Accepted Answer

The exclusionary rule is a well-established remedy used by courts to prevent the government from using illegally or unconstitutionally obtained evidence in criminal cases. It is the most frequently used means to address constitutional violations by the government in criminal cases.

Question 10

In order to reduce the use of discretion by police officers and judges, the Supreme Court has developed a detailed formula for determining probable cause that universally fits all crimes.

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court has developed various standards for determining probable cause depending on the specific circumstances and types of crimes involved. There is no one universal formula that applies to all situations.

Question 11

If a person is an employee of any governmental agency or is an agent of the government in any capacity, that person is bound by the Fourth Amendment.

Accepted Answer

The Fourth Amendment applies to all individuals, regardless of their employment status or relationship with the government. It protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by government officials.

Question 12

Deterring government misconduct is the primary purpose of the:

Accepted Answer

The exclusionary rule is a legal principle that prohibits illegally obtained evidence from being used in court. Its primary purpose is to deter government misconduct, such as unlawful searches and seizures, by sanctioning the government's use of illegally obtained evidence. This, in turn, protects citizens' Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Question 13

Which doctrine states that evidence obtained as a result of an earlier illegality must be excluded from trial?

Accepted Answer

The doctrine that states that evidence obtained as a result of an earlier illegality must be excluded from trial is called the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. This doctrine holds that any evidence derived from an unlawful search or seizure is tainted and must be excluded from trial as "fruit" of the original illegality.

Question 14

The Court devised the two-pronged test for using and gathering information from informants in Aguilar v. Texas (1964).

Accepted Answer

The Court indeed established the two-pronged test for using and gathering information from informants in Aguilar v. Texas (1964).

Question 15

The exclusionary rule applies in both criminal and civil trials in which a constitutional right has been violated.

Accepted Answer

The exclusionary rule primarily applies in criminal cases to prevent the government from using evidence obtained in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights, and it is not generally applied in civil trials.

Question 16

The Fourth Amendment restricts the actions of all U.S. citizens.

Accepted Answer

The Fourth Amendment restricts the actions of the government, not individual citizens, by protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Question 17

In Illinois v. Wardlow (2000), a stop was held lawful because the suspect was in a high-crime area and fled upon seeing the police.

Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court held that the police had reasonable suspicion to stop the suspect based on his flight from police in a high-crime area, making the stop lawful.

Question 18

The two basic source categories of probable cause are observational and informational.

Accepted Answer

This is true. Observational probable cause is based on direct observation of facts or circumstances, while informational probable cause relies on information obtained through investigation or reliable sources.

Question 19

Instances in which police officers are not aware that they are violating Fourth Amendment principles involve an exception to the law referred to as:

Accepted Answer

The good faith doctrine allows evidence to be admissible in court even if it was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment if the police officers believed their actions were legal at the time. This exception applies when officers act in good faith and with a reasonable belief that their actions were lawful, even if it is later determined that they were mistaken.

Question 20

The exclusionary rule goes back as far as 1886, when the Supreme Court held, in Boyd v. United States, that forced disclosure of papers evidencing a crime could not be admissible in court.

Accepted Answer

The statement correctly describes the history of the exclusionary rule.

Quiz 7: The Fourth Amendment: an Overview of Constitutional Searches and Seizures