Question 1

Good Faith evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the evidence was discovered while the officers were acting with _____________ assurance of the validity of their action.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Good Faith evidence may be admissible if...

Question 2

____________ discovery evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the evidence would have been discovered without the illegal act.

Accepted Answer

The answer of ____________ discovery evidence may be admissible if...

Question 3

_____________ source evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the evidence could have derived from a source removed from the causal link.

Accepted Answer

The answer of _____________ source evidence may be admissible if...

Question 4

____________ evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the causal connection between the illegal action and the seizure of the evidence is sufficiently attenuated.

Accepted Answer

The answer of ____________ evidence may be admissible if the...

Question 5

Evidence seized in an unlawful manner may also be admissible if the defendant lacks the legal ____________ to move to suppress it.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Evidence seized in an unlawful manner may...

Question 6

The Court has ruled that the voluntary ___________ of an item negates any expectation of privacy that an individual may claim to it in the future.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The Court has ruled that the voluntary...

Question 7

Some areas attached to a private residence is known as____________.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Some areas attached to a private residence...

Question 8

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Hester v. United States

Accepted Answer

Hester v. United States is significant for being the first case to consider the issue of throw-away evidence, where evidence discarded by a suspect in an attempt to avoid arrest was deemed admissible.

Question 9

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Rochin v. California

Accepted Answer

Rochin v. California is notable for being a precursor to Mapp v. Ohio, dealing with the involuntary pumping of a suspect's stomach to obtain evidence, which the Court found to be inadmissible due to the manner in which it was obtained.

Question 10

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Wong Sun v. United States

Accepted Answer

Wong Sun v. United States introduced the notion of the "fruits of the poisonous tree," which means that evidence obtained from an illegal search or interrogation cannot be used in court.

Question 11

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Nix v. Williams

Accepted Answer

Nix v. Williams established the "inevitable discovery" exception, allowing evidence that would have been discovered eventually by lawful means to be admissible in court, even if initially uncovered during an illegal search.

Question 12

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Weeks v. United States

Accepted Answer

Weeks v. United States introduced the Exclusionary Rule, which prohibits the use of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Question 13

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Fahy v. Connecticut

Accepted Answer

The answer of Match up the court case to the...

Question 14

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Mapp v. Ohio

Accepted Answer

Mapp v. Ohio is significant for applying the Exclusionary Rule to the states, meaning evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible in state courts.

Question 15

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-United States v. Leon

Accepted Answer

United States v. Leon established the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, allowing evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to be admitted in court if law enforcement officers were acting on a defective search warrant they believed to be valid.

Question 16

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-Brown v. Illinois

Accepted Answer

Brown v. Illinois established the three-prong test for the evaluation of attenuation, which is used to determine when evidence is too tainted by illegal government action to be admissible in court.

Question 17

Match up the court case to the significant outcome :
-United States v. Janis

Accepted Answer

United States v. Janis addressed the application of the exclusionary rule to civil cases, specifically determining that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment could be used in civil proceedings, marking a significant limitation on the scope of the exclusionary rule.

Question 18

Discuss the fundamentals of the Silver platter doctrine and the "fruits of the poisonous tree."

Accepted Answer

The answer of Discuss the fundamentals of the Silver platter...

Question 19

Under what circumstances are the fruits of the poisonous tree allowed to be introduced as evidence?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Under what circumstances are the fruits of...

Question 20

Prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures applies only to government agents and officials. Discuss key concepts surrounding private searches, private persons, and third-party origination.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures applies...

Quiz 5: The Exclusionary Rule and the Fourth Amendment

Good Faith evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the evidence was discovered while the officers were acting with _____________ assurance of the validity of their action.

____________ discovery evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the evidence would have been discovered without the illegal act.

_____________ source evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the evidence could have derived from a source removed from the causal link.

____________ evidence may be admissible if the state can demonstrate that the causal connection between the illegal action and the seizure of the evidence is sufficiently attenuated.

Evidence seized in an unlawful manner may also be admissible if the defendant lacks the legal ____________ to move to suppress it.

The Court has ruled that the voluntary ___________ of an item negates any expectation of privacy that an individual may claim to it in the future.

Some areas attached to a private residence is known as____________.

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Hester v. United States

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Rochin v. California

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Wong Sun v. United States

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Nix v. Williams

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Weeks v. United States

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Fahy v. Connecticut

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Mapp v. Ohio

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -United States v. Leon

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -Brown v. Illinois

Match up the court case to the significant outcome : -United States v. Janis

Discuss the fundamentals of the Silver platter doctrine and the "fruits of the poisonous tree."

Under what circumstances are the fruits of the poisonous tree allowed to be introduced as evidence?

Prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures applies only to government agents and officials. Discuss key concepts surrounding private searches, private persons, and third-party origination.