Accounting
Anthropology
Archaeology
Art History
Banking
Biology & Life Science
Business
Business Communication
Business Development
Business Ethics
Business Law
Chemistry
Communication
Computer Science
Counseling
Criminal Law
Curriculum & Instruction
Design
Earth Science
Economic
Education
Engineering
Finance
History & Theory
Humanities
Human Resource
International Business
Investments & Securities
Journalism
Law
Management
Marketing
Medicine
Medicine & Health Science
Nursing
Philosophy
Physic
Psychology
Real Estate
Science
Social Science
Sociology
Special Education
Speech
Visual Arts
Law
Q:
In the Federal Rules of Evidence, one form of statement that is specifically excluded from the definition of hearsay is termed the _____________ rule.
Q:
Criticism of the incorporation doctrine is particularly harsh when the national standards established in the incorporation doctrine are applied to:
a. local police.
b. local prosecutors.
c. state supreme courts.
d. federal law enforcement agencies.
Q:
In the Federal Rules of Evidence, one form of statement that is specifically excluded from the definition of hearsay is a(n) _____________ by a party-opponent.
Q:
In the Federal Rules of Evidence, one form of statement that is specifically excluded from the definition of hearsay is the prior statement of the ______________ currently on the witness stand.
Q:
The total incorporation doctrine:a. leaves the states more freedom to determine their own procedures than the fundamental fairness doctrine.b. means that the equal protection clause incorporates the provisions in all of the Bill of Rights relating to criminal procedure.c. would incorporate in total those rights in the Bill of Rights that are "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty."d. means that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the provisions in all of the Bill of Rights relating to criminal procedure.
Q:
In Palko v. Connecticut (1937), what procedural issue is referenced by Justice Cardozo in his opinion concerning the applicability of the Bill of Rights to the states?a. Excessive bailb. Double jeopardyc. Fundamental fairnessd. Ineffective counsel
Q:
The hearsay rule applies only to statements that are offered to prove the truth of the matter _____ in that statement.
Q:
In the definition of hearsay, the _____ is the person who originally made the statement.
Q:
Selective incorporation means:a. the state legislatures can select which provisions in the Bill of Rights to incorporate.b. only some of the Bill of Rights are incorporated into the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.c. only the Fourth and Fifth Amendments are incorporated into the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.d. state supreme courts shall decide which provisions in the Bill of Rights their states should incorporate.
Q:
Although he concurred with the result in Rochin v. California, Justice Black disagreed with the majority's approach to deciding what constitutes due process because he felt:a. that the conviction should have stood.b. the majority's approach gave individual justices too much leeway to enforce their own notions of justice on the states.c. it was too rigid and unbending.d. the Court had no business reviewing state court convictions.
Q:
The abuses of using hearsay at criminal trials were highlighted in the 1603 trial of Sir _____.
Q:
Because of their liberal use of hearsay against criminal defendants, the _____ trials during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I have become infamous.
Q:
The Supreme Court in Rochin v. California, involving police officers who forced a stomach pumping in order to retrieve swallowed narcotics, held that the:
a. Fifth Amendment applies to the states.
b. Fourth Amendment applies to the states.
c. Fifth Amendment due process clause does not apply to the states.
d. police conduct shocked the conscience and violated due process.
Q:
The Federal Rules of Evidence contain _____ exceptions to the hearsay rule.
Q:
Constitutionalism assumes which of the following statements to be TRUE? a. Laws and constitutions are both considered to be sets of guidelines for behavior. b. Constitutions can never be changed under any circumstances once created.c. The constitution is never considered to be binding on the government in any way.d. Constitutions embody the core values and collective will of the people.
Q:
The rule against hearsay and the _____ Amendment Confrontation Clause address similar problems.
Q:
In which case did the court say that regarding selective enforcement of drug laws the majority of elevated penalties fall on Blacks while the majority of users were white?
a. Miranda v Arizona
b. Terry v Ohio
c. U.S. v Armstrong
d. U.S. v Weeks
Q:
According to Wigmore, the rule against hearsay was one of the greatest contributions to the English legal system.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The Eighth Amendment guarantees which of the following?
a. The right to be free from unreasonable searches.
b. The right against double jeopardy.
c. The right to an impartial jury.
d. The right against cruel and unusual punishment.
Q:
In Hurtado v. Californiathe defendant complained that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated because he was not properly indicted by a grand jury. The Supreme Court ruled against him because:
a. his crime wasn"t a capital or otherwise infamous crime.
b. California, unlike the federal government, could use an information rather than a grand jury indictment to charge Hurtado.
c. he confessed, so due process was irrelevant.
d. the California grand jury had properly indicted him.
Q:
Prior to the 1600s, English courts strictly enforced the rule against hearsay evidence in criminal cases.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The fundamental fairness doctrine of due process requires states to provide:a. notice to defendants of the charges against them, an attorney at state expense if they cannot afford one, and a hearing on the facts before conviction and punishment.b. notice to defendants of the charges against them and hearing on the facts before conviction and punishment. c. a grand jury proceeding only.d. notice to defendants of the charges against them, a grand jury proceeding, and a hearing on the facts before conviction and punishment.
Q:
A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act.
a. True
b. False
Q:
According to the Supreme Court in Powell v. Alabama, the famous "Scottsboro Case" of 1932 involving several black youths accused of raping two white girls on a train:a. the entire Bill of Rights applies to state criminal procedure.b. the due process clause requires states to follow all of the federal government's rules of criminal procedure.c. all criminal defendants are entitled to a lawyer in every criminal case free of charge.d. in the severe circumstances of this case, the state was required under the federal Constitution to provide counsel for the defendants.
Q:
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, certain statements by co-conspirators are not hearsay. a. True
b. False
Q:
In general, hearsay evidence is not admissible.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Statements offered to show knowledge, feelings, state of mind, or effect on the hearer are not hearsay.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The First World War and the rise of fascism:
a. gave rise to a stronger faith in government in America.
b. had little or no effect on American criminal procedure.
c. led to calls for the abolition of the Fourteenth Amendment.
d. revived traditional American fears of arbitrary government.
Q:
In Hurtado v. California (1884), involving the murder by Hurtado of his wife's lover, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause:a. requires jury trials in all state courts.b. requires states to provide a grand jury indictment in capital cases.c. does not forbid states to use the death penalty because it does not define defendants of a "fundamental right" in capital cases.d. does not require states to provide a grand jury indictment in capital cases.
Q:
A written document cannot be considered hearsay evidence.
a. True
b. False
Q:
According to your text, which of the following subjects is not a primary object of study in a criminal procedure course?
a. Equal protection of the law
b. Criminal law
c. Procedural due process
d. Fundamental fairness
Q:
The term "due process revolution" refers to the:
a. Supreme Court's expansion of individual rights in the 1960s.
b. civil unrest that swept the U.S. in the 1960s.
c. passage of the Fourteenth Amendment.
d. adoption of the fundamental fairness doctrine by the Court in the 1930s.
Q:
In the definition of hearsay, the declarant is the person who originally made the statement and is not on the witness stand.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The Star Chamber trials are among the most infamous in English history.
a. True
b. False
Q:
With respect to the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause:a. the Supreme court has defined it differently over time.b. it applied initially to the federal government only.c. courts did not extend its protection to state criminal justice during the 20th century.d. due process is synonymous with equal protection.
Q:
The Fourteenth Amendment:a. was enacted after the Civil War and helped establish federal supremacy over states' rights. b. contains a due process clause.c. embodied the idea that all are entitled to equal rights.d. was enacted after the Civil War, helped establish federal supremacy over states' rights, embodied the idea that all are entitled to equal rights, and contains a due process clause.
Q:
What Is Not Hearsay? Federal Rules of Evidence 801(d)(1), 801(d)(2), and 801(d)(2)(E)
a. True
b. False
Q:
The Federal Rules of Evidence contain at more than 20 exceptions to the rule against hearsay.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The term "parallel rights" refers to:
a. rights guaranteed by a state constitution that are similar to the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
b. rights guaranteed by a state constitution that include rights not guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
c. rights guaranteed by state statute that are similar to the rights included in the state constitution.
d. state rights that have been replaced by federal rights.
Q:
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, admissions by a party-opponent are always defined as hearsay.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The U.S. Constitution:a. sets minimum national constitutional standards.b. sets the highest possible constitutional standards, but only for the federal government.c. sets the highest possible constitutional standards, both for state and national governments.d. prescribes detailed rules for police officers to follow when arresting citizens.
Q:
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, certain types of prior statements by witnesses are excluded from the definition of hearsay.
a. True
b. False
Q:
A decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that is based on an interpretation of a provision of the U.S. Constitution is binding on:
a. all lower federal courts only.
b. state courts only.
c. both state courts and lower federal courts.
d. all other U.S. courts, but only for the next twenty years.
Q:
Non-verbal acts (such as a nod of the head) can never be hearsay.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The U.S. Supreme Court has the power to manage how the lower federal courts conduct their business. This is called the Court's:a. power of judicial review.b. due process standard.c. supreme power.d. supervisory power.
Q:
The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution:
a. explicitly provides for judicial review.
b. vests final government authority in the U.S. Constitution.
c. only applies to the federal government.
d. does not apply to state court decisions.
Q:
One of the requirements for a statement to be defined as hearsay is that the statement is not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.
a. True
b. False
Q:
One of the requirements for a statement to be defined as hearsay is that the statement be assertive.
a. True
b. False
Q:
The due process revolution occurred: a. during the 16th and 17th centuries. b. between 1781 and 1900.c. in the new era of crime control between 1900 and 1960.d. between 1960 and 1969.
Q:
According to the __________, the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation trumps the interpretation of all other courts, federal and local, and of Congress and all state and local legislatures.a. Supremacy clauseb. Principle of judicial review c. Supervisory power clause d. Supreme review clause
Q:
The 1603 trial of William Penn sparked interest in reforming the law of hearsay.
a. True
b. False
Q:
There are no exceptions to the hearsay rule in the Federal Rules of Evidence.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Which of the following is NOT a source of criminal procedural law?
a. State court opinions
b. Model Code of Pre-Arraignment Procedure
c. Administrative agency regulations
d. State rules of criminal procedure
Q:
The sources of American criminal procedure law include:
a. the U.S. Constitution.
b. federal rules of criminal procedure and state court opinions.
c. U.S. Supreme Court decisions and federal rules of criminal procedure.
d. the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, federal rules of criminal procedure, and state court opinions.
Q:
The introduction of hearsay evidence can raise serious issues under the confrontation clause.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Exceptions to the law of hearsay evidence tend to be simple and straight forward.
a. True
b. False
Q:
Criminal procedure refers to the methods the government can use to:
a. investigate criminals.
b. investigate and prosecute criminals.
c. investigate, prosecute, and convict criminals.
d. investigate, prosecute, convict, and punish criminals.
Q:
The Sixth Amendment guarantees which of the following?a. The right to be free from unreasonable searches. b. The right against double jeopardy.c. The right to an impartial jury.d. The right to due process of law.
Q:
Case 7.3Police respond to the scene of an apparent arson incident which involved a vacant commercial office building. The fire was discovered at 3:30 a.m. by a passing patrol unit, shortly after it had started. The initial officers on scene found all exterior doors locked and made forced entry to check for potential victims.Fire officials report signs and evidence of accelerants near each stairwell. An empty kerosene can was found outside the structure, in the bushes by the property line. A premises history reveals that the property has been vacant for almost a year and has been for sale twice as long. Town records show several denied zoning and building adjustment applications over the past two years. There are numerous property maintenance violations for the property as well.Detectives following up on the case find the property owner Slim Shady uncooperative and claiming he knows nothing about the fire. He states that he was at home the entire night, hanging with his partner Rico Tubbs. Background investigations reveal that Mr. Shady also operates Shady Flooring and Paint. He owns a working van with the markings "Shady Flooring and Paint". Detectives also discover that Mr. Shady increased his insurance of the incident property six months prior to the fire.Detectives interview Slim Shady's neighbor who reports seeing Mr. Tubbs vehicle in the driveway. He also reports hearing a vehicle pull into the driveway and two males arguing about a can. The neighbor recognized the voice of Mr. Shady and states that Mr. Shady was yelling at the other male for leaving a can behind. According to the neighbor, the other male said that he threw it into the bushes with all the other garbage.Detectives question Mr. Tubbs, who initially states that he and Mr. Shady were hanging out at Mr. Shady's house all night. Detectives re-interview Mr. Tubbs several days later and tell him that they can place Mr. Shady, his work van, and another person going to and from the scene; and that they have retrieved surveillance video from several stores adjacent to the crime scene. Mr. Tubbs then changes his story, claiming that he just took a ride with Mr. Shady, who had told him that he left some flooring supplies in the building. He claims he was unaware of Mr. Shady's intentions or actions until after he ran out of the building and threw an empty can of kerosene at Mr. Tubbs. Mr. Tubbs further states "Slim threatened to mess me up because I was already on parole". Ultimately, Mr. Shady and Mr. Tubbs are charged with the arson.Can Mr. Tubbs' out-of-court statement implicating Mr. Shady in the arson by admitted at trial?a. No, because it requires that inferences be madeb. Yes, because of the party-opponent rulec. Yes, because of the co-conspirator ruled. No, because it violates the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment
Q:
The U.S. Supreme Court has used the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to extend most of the protections in the Bill of Rights to state criminal proceedings.a. Trueb. False
Q:
According to Justice William Brennan, by the 1970s, the incorporation doctrine had virtually no impact on law.a. Trueb. False
Q:
Case 7.3Police respond to the scene of an apparent arson incident which involved a vacant commercial office building. The fire was discovered at 3:30 a.m. by a passing patrol unit, shortly after it had started. The initial officers on scene found all exterior doors locked and made forced entry to check for potential victims.Fire officials report signs and evidence of accelerants near each stairwell. An empty kerosene can was found outside the structure, in the bushes by the property line. A premises history reveals that the property has been vacant for almost a year and has been for sale twice as long. Town records show several denied zoning and building adjustment applications over the past two years. There are numerous property maintenance violations for the property as well.Detectives following up on the case find the property owner Slim Shady uncooperative and claiming he knows nothing about the fire. He states that he was at home the entire night, hanging with his partner Rico Tubbs. Background investigations reveal that Mr. Shady also operates Shady Flooring and Paint. He owns a working van with the markings "Shady Flooring and Paint". Detectives also discover that Mr. Shady increased his insurance of the incident property six months prior to the fire.Detectives interview Slim Shady's neighbor who reports seeing Mr. Tubbs vehicle in the driveway. He also reports hearing a vehicle pull into the driveway and two males arguing about a can. The neighbor recognized the voice of Mr. Shady and states that Mr. Shady was yelling at the other male for leaving a can behind. According to the neighbor, the other male said that he threw it into the bushes with all the other garbage.Detectives question Mr. Tubbs, who initially states that he and Mr. Shady were hanging out at Mr. Shady's house all night. Detectives re-interview Mr. Tubbs several days later and tell him that they can place Mr. Shady, his work van, and another person going to and from the scene; and that they have retrieved surveillance video from several stores adjacent to the crime scene. Mr. Tubbs then changes his story, claiming that he just took a ride with Mr. Shady, who had told him that he left some flooring supplies in the building. He claims he was unaware of Mr. Shady's intentions or actions until after he ran out of the building and threw an empty can of kerosene at Mr. Tubbs. Mr. Tubbs further states "Slim threatened to mess me up because I was already on parole". Ultimately, Mr. Shady and Mr. Tubbs are charged with the arson.At trail, could the detective testify to the neighbor's out of court statement regarding hearing Mr. Shady yelling about the other person leaving a can behind if the neighbor were not available at trial as he is out of the country?a. Yes, because the testimony was not offered as evidence of the truth of the matter asserted.b. Yes, because the testimony does not violate the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment.c. No, because it requires the fact finder to draw inferences as to the defendants' intent.d. No, because the defense cannot cross-examine the neighbor who made the statement.
Q:
Case 7.2Brenda Lee is found murdered on the rear porch of her sorority house after having a heated argument with her boyfriend, Britt Reid, earlier in the evening. The women in the sorority house claim not to have any knowledge of the murder. The medical examiner conducts an autopsy and forensic testing reveals DNA evidence and blood other than the victim's on her clothing. Joe Carbone, a member of a fraternity two houses away, comes forward two days later and provides a statement that one of the sorority sisters, Shirley Temple, told Joe that she saw Britt Reid kill the victim. Bernie is ultimately charged with the murder of Brenda Lee.At trial the medical examiner presents photographs of the victim's injuries and blood soaked shirt. The medical examiner further testifies that blood and DNA samples found on the victim were matched to Mr. Reid. Is this testimony hearsay?a. No, the medical examiner personally performed the tests and is available for cross-examination.b. Yes, because the testimony violates the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth amendment.c. Yes, because it requires the fact finder to draw inferences as to the defendants' intent.d. No, because the testimony of medical examiners and other expert witnesses is specifically excluded from the hearsay rule.
Q:
Identify the two elements individuals must prove to succeed in a claim that government denied them equal protection of the law.
Q:
Why is the attorney-client privilege essential to the proper functioning of our judicial process?
Q:
Summarize the controversy generated by the U.S. Supreme Court's 1960s incorporation decisions.
Q:
Summarize the differences among the fundamental fairness, total incorporation, and selective incorporation doctrines as they influence state criminal procedures.
Q:
List the common examples of the use of judicial notice to prove matters of general knowledge:
Q:
Describe the 1970 California Supreme Court decision that defines "general knowledge" in reference to judicial notice.
Q:
Briefly trace the history of due process from the adoption of the U.S. Constitution to the present.
Q:
Should there be a universal acceptance of a parent-child privilege? Why or why not?
Q:
Should government information be "leaked" to the press? Why or why not? Do you agree that most of the business of government involves issues of security, making outside inspection a high risk? Defend your answer.
Q:
Explain why "hunches aren"t enough" in criminal procedure.
Q:
Describe the difference between formal and informal criminal procedure, and explain why both are essential to crime control in our constitutional democracy.
Q:
What are the requirements of the physician"patient privilege? What are some of the exceptions created in some jurisdictions?
Q:
What is the police"informant privilege? What is its rationale, and what are some exceptions to this privilege?
Q:
Describe the history of criminal procedure, and explain why it is described as a pendulum swing.
Q:
Who are the various actors and their roles in the "criminal justice road map?"
Q:
Discuss fully the scope of the privilege against self-incrimination. Be sure to provide examples.
Q:
Identify and describe the balance of values at the heart of our constitutional democracy and explain how and why that balance is flexible.