Ch 3-4 Quiz

Question 1

What is Level of Proof

Answer 1

the degree of certainty required by the law for an act by government agents to be legal

Question 2

What is Man of Reasonable Caution

Answer 2

refers to the average man or women on the street. It doesn’t refer to a person with training in the law

Question 3

Probable Cause Legal Definition

Answer 3

more than bare suspicion; it exists when the “facts circumstances within the officers knowledge of which they had reasonably trustworthy info are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been or is being committed”

Question 4

Probable Cause Practical Definition

Answer 4

exists when it is more likely than not (more than 50% certainty) that the suspect committed an offense or that the items sought can be found in a certain place

Question 5

Reasonable Suspicion

Answer 5

the quantum of knowledge sufficient to induce an ordinarily prudent or cautious person in similar circumstances to believing criminal activity is occurring

Question 6

Brinegar v. United States (1949)

Answer 6

probable cause is more than bare suspicion, it exists when the facts and circumstances within the officers knowledge of which they had reasonably trustworthy info are sufficient in themselves to justify a “man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been or is being committed

Question 7

Spinelli v. United States (1969)

Answer 7

“innocent seeming activity” and a “bad and illuminating assertion of suspicion “in an affidavit are not to be given weight in a magistrates determination of probable cause. An officer may use credible hearsay to establish probable cause, but an affidavit based on an informants tip must satisfy the 2-pronged Agrilar test

Question 8

Michigan v. Summers (1981)

Answer 8

the general rule is that every arrest, as well as every seizure having the essential attribute of a formal arrest, is unreasonable unless supported by probable cause

Question 9

Alabama v. White (1990)

Answer 9

reasonable suspicion is a less demanding standard than probable cause. It can be established with info different in quantity or content from that required to establish probable cause

Question 10

Maryland v. Pringle (2003)

Answer 10

in determining probable cause, the term “man of reasonable caution” is best interpreted using the standard of an “objectively reasonable police officer”
examine events leading up to arrest
test whether or not there is p.c. to believe that the passengers committed the crime solely or jointly

Question 11

Caroll v. United States (1925)

Answer 11

where the officers would have facts and circumstances available to them as would “Warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief” that an offense has been committed or is being committed

vehicles - mobility: cars can leave; visibility: windows reduce expectation of privacy

Question 12

What is the Legal Standard for Arrests

Answer 12

Probable Cause

there has to be a person who did it, attach crime to act and act to specific person
bad guy bad act

Question 13

What are the Sources of Probable Cause

Answer 13

Collection that builds towards conviction
-Officer Observation -Officer idk -Witnesses -Victims
-Record Checks -Title 3 -137s (informants) -Suspect Testimony

Question 14

What are the steps for the Reasonableness Cause

Answer 14

1) Limited Detention - get answer to question of whats going on, if reasonable answer no pat down
2) Limited Search- once red flag appears you can pat down, to be hands on, one reason only: fear of officer safety (fear is the trigger)

Question 15

What does the Terry Stop include

Answer 15

3 guys casing store, pat down and found unlawfully carried weapons
What was the crime? Hadn’t happened yet, no probable cause yet
Reasonable Suspicion: we don’t want cops to have to wait for crime, we want them to be proactive
possible bad guy, possible bad act

Question 16

Guilt/Suspicion Graph

Answer 16

15%-25%: hunch/guess
25%-50%: reasonable suspicion
50%-85%: probable cause
49%-84%: preponderance
85%-100%: beyond a reasonable doubt

Question 17

Probable Cause 4 Important Areas of Police Work

Answer 17

1. Arrests with a Warrant
2. Arrests without a Warrant
3. searches and seizures of property with a warrant
4. Searches and seizures of property without a warrant

Question 18

United States v. Ortiz (1975)

Answer 18

ruled that “officers are entitled to draw reasonable inferences from these facts in light of their knowledge of the area and their prior experience

Question 19

Illinois v. Gates (1983)

Answer 19

the 2 prongs for determining informants should be treated as relevant considerations in the totality of circumstances

Question 20

Whiteley v. Warden (1971)

Answer 20

info not included in the affidavit cannot be used to determine p.c. even if the p.o. knew about that info at the time the affidavit was submitted

Question 21

3 Ways to Establish P.C.

Answer 21

1) through a p.o.’s own knowledge of particular facts and circumstances
2) through info given by a reliable 3rd person informant
3) though info given by an informant plus corroboration by the p.o.

Question 22

Aguilar v. Texas (1964)

Answer 22

2 prongs: reliability of the informant and reliability of the informants info
both must be present

Question 23

United States v. Arizona (2002)

Answer 23

r.s. is to be determined based on the totally of circumstances

Question 24

Exclusionary Rule

Answer 24

evidence obtained by the gov in violation of the 4th Amend guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure in not admissible in a criminal prosecution to prove guilt

Question 25

Judge Made Rule

Answer 25

rule crafted by judges not provided for in the Constitution

Question 26

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine

Answer 26

once the primary evidence is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary and derived from it is also inadmissible

Question 27

Good Faith Doctrine

Answer 27

Evidence obtained by the police is admissible even if there was an error or mistake, as long as the error or mistake was not committed by the police, or, if committed by the police, it was honest and reasonable

Question 28

Harmless Error

Answer 28

the evidence erroneously admitted by the trial court didn’t contribute to the conviction and there is other evidence to support the verdict

Question 29

Inevitable Discovery Exception

Answer 29

evidence is admissible if the police can prove that they would inevitably have discovered the evidence anyway by lawful means

Question 30

Independent Source Exception

Answer 30

evidence obtained is admissible if the police can prove that it was obtained from an independent source not connected with the illegal search or seizure

Question 31

Purged Taint Exception

Answer 31

Evidence obtained is admissible if the defendant’s subsequent voluntary act dissipates the taint of the initial illegality

Question 32

Silver Platter Doctrine

Answer 32

permitted federal courts to admit evidence illegally seized by state L.E. and hand over to Fed officers for use in Fed cases

Question 33

standing

Answer 33

a legal concept that determines whether a person can legally file a lawsuit or submit a petition to the court

Question 34

Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. U.S. (1920)

Answer 34

once the primary evidence (the “tree”) is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary evidence (the “fruit”) derived from it is also inadmissible.
This case enunciated the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine

Question 35

Elkins v. U.S. (1968)

Answer 35

the 4th Amend prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in federal or state officers.
This case eliminated the silver platter doctrine

Question 36

Mapp v.Ohio (1961)

Answer 36

the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure, is applicable to state criminal proceedings

Question 37

United States v. Leon (1984)

Answer 37

the 4th Amends exclusionary rule should not be applied to bar the prosecution from using evidence that has been obtained by officers acting in reasonable reliance on a search warrant that is issued by a detached neutral magistrate but is ultimately found to be invalid

Question 38

Herring v. U.S. (2009)

Answer 38

evidence obtained by the police from unlawful searches is admissible as long. as the police mistakes that led to unlawful search are merely the result of isolated negligence not the product of systematic error or reckless disregard of constitutional rights

Question 39

Weeks v. U.S. (1914)

Answer 39

exclusionary rule applied to fed agents only

Question 40

Exclusionary Rule Primary Purpose

Answer 40

deter police misconduct

Question 41

Wolf v. Co (1949)

Answer 41

warned states that they needed to do something about illegally obtained evidence

Question 42

Won Sung Case

Answer 42

fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine and doctrine of attenuation

Question 43

derivative evidence

Answer 43

tainted secondary evidence from fruit of the poisonous tree

Question 44

Massachusetts v. Sheppard (1984)

Answer 44

good faith doctrine

Question 45

When does the Exclusionary Rule Not Apply

Answer 45

1) police violations of the knock-and-announce rule
2) in searches and seizures by private persons
3) grand jury investigations
4) as part of the sentencing determination
5) arrests based on p.c. that violate state law
6) violations of agency rules
7) noncriminal proceedings
8) parole revocation hearings

Question 46

Habeas Corpus Proceedings

Answer 46

a proceeding that seeks the defendant’s release from jail or prison because their constitutional rights were allegedly violated before or during trial

Question 47

Minnesota v. Carter (1998)

Answer 47

general rule on standing is that the exclusionary rule may be used only by the person whose 4th Amend rights have been violated, meaning the person whose reasonable expectation of privacy was breached by the police

Question 48

Exceptions to the Exclusionary Rule

Answer 48

1) good faith
2) inevitable discovery
3) purged taint exception
4) independent source exception