Question 1

A temporary and limited interference with the freedom of a person for investigative purposes is the definition of a/an

Accepted Answer

A detention is a temporary and limited interference with a person's freedom of movement. It is often used for investigative purposes, such as questioning a suspect or gathering evidence, but does not involve the formal charges of an arrest. An affidavit is a written statement made under oath, and charging refers to the formal accusation of a crime.

Question 2

The due process clause is found in which Amendment of the Bill of Rights?

Accepted Answer

The Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights includes the due process clause, which mandates that the government must follow fair and just procedures before depriving an individual of life, liberty, or property.

Question 3

Which of the following is not usually required to be in the contents of a valid arrest warrant?

Accepted Answer

An arrest warrant is a legal document issued by a judge, magistrate or other authorized judicial officer that authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for a specific crime. The contents of a valid arrest warrant typically include the authority under which the warrant is issued, the identity of the person to be arrested, and the designation of the offense. The authority to search the person arrested is not usually required to be in the contents of a valid arrest warrant.

Question 4

What burden of proof is required to obtain a search warrant?

Accepted Answer

A search warrant requires probable cause, which means that there is a reasonable belief that a crime has been committed and that the evidence of that crime is located in the place to be searched. Reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause, while preponderance of evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt are higher standards used in trials, not for obtaining search warrants.

Question 5

Which of the following is not an exception to the legal requirement of having a warrant to conduct a search and seizure?

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is B) incident to an unlawful arrest. This is because the legal exceptions to the requirement of having a warrant for search and seizure include situations where consent is given, when exigent circumstances exist (such as the need to prevent the destruction of evidence), and to conduct an inventory (such as of a vehicle upon impoundment). However, a search incident to an unlawful arrest would not be a valid exception to the warrant requirement, as the arrest itself is not lawful.

Question 6

A John Doe warrant is valid

Accepted Answer

A John Doe warrant is also known as a "John Doe" or "unknown suspect" warrant, and can be issued when there is a particular description of the perpetrator of a crime but their name is not known. It is not valid in all cases, and can be issued at state and federal levels.

Question 7

Procedural law deals with all of the following except

Accepted Answer

Procedural law deals with the rules and processes of how legal cases are handled, including arrest procedures, search and seizure, and the admissibility of evidence. However, it does not deal with the elements of a crime, which fall under substantive law.

Question 8

Which Supreme Court case held that officers executing a search warrant of a house acted reasonably by detaining the occupants of the house in handcuffs during the search?

Accepted Answer

Muehler v. Mena held that officers executing a search warrant act reasonably when they detain the occupants of the house in handcuffs during the search, as it ensures officer safety and preserves the integrity of the search.

Question 9

The ingredients of arrest include all of the following except

Accepted Answer

Force is not a necessary component of an arrest; an arrest can occur without the use of force. The essential elements are intention, authority, and custody.

Question 10

A written statement of the information known to the officer that serves as the basis for the issuance of a warrant is a/an

Accepted Answer

An affidavit is a written statement that outlines the information known to an officer that serves as the basis for the issuance of a warrant. It is typically given to a judge or magistrate and is used to request a warrant for an arrest or search.

Question 11

Which of the following cases established the rule that any evidence unreasonably searched and seized could no longer be admissible in any court?

Accepted Answer

Mapp v. Ohio established the rule that any evidence unreasonably searched and seized could no longer be admissible in any court.

Question 12

Suspicion plus facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonable person,exercising ordinary caution,under the same circumstances to believe that a crime has been,is being,or is about to be committed is a definition of

Accepted Answer

Probable cause is defined as having enough suspicion and evidence that a reasonable person would believe that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed. This is the legal standard required for law enforcement to make arrests, obtain search warrants, and conduct investigative detentions.

Question 13

Which of the following can be used to establish probable cause?

Accepted Answer

Personal observations and knowledge of the investigator can provide specific and factual information that can establish probable cause for a crime, such as witness statements, video footage, or forensic evidence. Suspicion or crime rates are not enough to establish probable cause, and occupation of the suspect is not necessarily relevant to the case.

Question 14

Which of the following protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures?

Accepted Answer

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. It requires that searches and seizures be based on probable cause and that any warrant issued be supported by oath or affirmation and describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

Question 15

A judicial order commanding a person to whom it is issued or some other person to bring a person promptly before a court to answer a criminal charge is a/an

Accepted Answer

The given definition matches the definition of an arrest warrant, which is a type of judicial order commanding a person to bring a person before a court to answer a criminal charge. Affidavit is a written statement made under oath or affirmation, and a court order can refer to any type of order issued by a court, which may or may not be related to bringing a person before the court for a criminal charge.

Question 16

Incriminating evidence is found during a consent search.What is the primary factor of the search that the court will look at in deciding whether evidence may be admitted?

Accepted Answer

The primary factor that the court will look at in deciding whether evidence may be admitted during a consent search is whether the consent to search was voluntarily given. If the court finds that the suspect was coerced, intimidated, or deceived into giving consent, the evidence may be suppressed. It is not necessary for a consent form to be completed, witnessed, or for the suspect to observe the search when the evidence was found. The suspect's sobriety or state of mind is not a determining factor in the court's decision.

Question 17

What term is used to recognize that a warrantless entry by law enforcement officials may be legal when there is a compelling need for official action and no time to get a warrant?

Accepted Answer

The term used to recognize that a warrantless entry by law enforcement officials may be legal when there is a compelling need for official action and no time to get a warrant is "exigent circumstances." This term refers to situations where law enforcement officials cannot wait to obtain a warrant because of the urgency of the situation, such as when there is a risk of danger to people or property, or when evidence may be destroyed or lost.

Question 18

Until 1914,federal law enforcement officers,conducting an illegal search that produced incriminating evidence,were allowed to use that evidence in court.What happened that changed the use of illegal evidence by federal officers?

Accepted Answer

The case of Weeks v. United States, decided in 1914, established the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of evidence obtained illegally by federal law enforcement officers in federal court. This decision set a precedent for state courts as well, and was later solidified in the case of Mapp v. Ohio. Therefore, choice D is the correct answer. Choice A is not accurate as no such presidential order exists. Choice B is also not accurate as J. Edgar Hoover did not have the authority to make such an executive order. Choice C is incorrect as Mapp v. Ohio dealt with the exclusionary rule's application to state courts.

Question 19

Which Supreme Court Case established the "moveable vehicle" rule?

Accepted Answer

Carroll v. United States (1925) established the "moveable vehicle" rule, which allows law enforcement officers to search a vehicle without a warrant as long as they have probable cause to believe that it contains contraband or evidence of a crime and the vehicle is capable of being moved away before a warrant can be obtained.

Question 20

Circumventing the intent of Weeks v.U.S.,whereby federal officers received illegally obtained evidence from state officers and used it in federal court was referred to as

Accepted Answer

The silver platter doctrine refers to the practice of federal officers receiving evidence obtained illegally by state officers and using it in federal court, which circumvents the intent of Weeks v. U.S. The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine pertains to evidence obtained as a result of an illegal search or seizure, and the unreasonable search doctrine requires that searches and seizures be conducted with a warrant and based on probable cause. None of these doctrines specifically address the issue of federal officers using evidence obtained illegally by state officers.

Quiz 2: Legal Aspects of Investigation