CJUS 410 Quiz Misconduct Remedies

CJUS 410 Quiz: Misconduct Remedies, Court Proceedings, and Courtroom Actors

1. The 1961 case that reversed Wolf v. Colorado and made the states follow the exclusionary rule was:
2. What rule is a protective procedure against violations of constitutional rights?
3. According to your text, what percentage of all criminal cases will be dismissed because the police seized evidence illegally?
4. Initially, the exclusionary rule only applied to which of the following?
5. What exception says that illegally obtained evidence can come into court if the poisonous connection between the illegal police actions and the resulting evidence weakens enough?
6. Which doctrine holds that illegally seized evidence can be introduced at trial, if the officials’ law-breaking behavior did not cause the seizure of the evidence?
7. The good-faith exception is what type of standard?
8. Which of the following is a social cost of the exclusionary rule?
9. S. v. Moscatiello (1985) created what exception to the exclusionary rule?
10. Which justification for the exclusionary rule prevents officers from breaking the law?
11. What exception allows the use of illegally obtained evidence in nontrial proceedings?
12. SCOTUS applied the exclusionary rule to the states through what amendment to the Constitution?
13. In what case did SCOTUS hold that failure to comply with the knock-and- announce rule never violates the exclusionary rule, if officers have a valid warrant to search a home?
14. The text refers to which of the following as police actions and procedures that violate any of the five constitutional rights?
15. Which of the following is statistically the single greatest cause of injury to women in America?
16. According to SCOTUS, there is an exception to the no-duty-to-protect rule called the special-relationship exception. That special relationship is:
17. All of the following are stages of internal review, except:
18. Which legal doctrine prohibits people from suing the government without its consent?
19. When the government takes people into custody against their will, the government:
20. What are lawsuits against individual law enforcement officers called?
21. According to the defense of official immunity, an officer is personally liable:
22. SCOTUS has put which of the following limitations on § 1983 actions?
23. The U.S. government can be sued for the constitutional torts of federal law enforcement officers who have the authority to search and arrest under:
24. In Beltran v. City of El Paso (2004), the Court ruled that:
25. Bivens actions are:
26. Prosecutors enjoy different types of immunity, depending on the type of action they are engaged in at the time of the misconduct. What is this type of immunity called?
27. How do victims of government violations of individuals’ constitutional rights sue for damages?
28. In Strickland v. Washington, the Court created a two-prong test to evaluate which aspect of the criminal defendant’s experience?
29. If defendants are indicted or bound over, what is the next step in the criminal process?
30. Diversion involves which of the following activities?
31. In what cases do prosecutors agree to drop the charges before formal judicial proceedings begin, on the condition that suspects participate in and complete a program?
32. Which case addressed the issue of whether pretrial conditions before convictions constitute punishment?
33. All of the following are concerns regarding the amount of bail, except:
34. Which case allowed the right to counsel for “indigents” for felonies?
35. What right-to-counsel standard holds that only lawyers whose behavior is so shocking that it turns the trial into a joke are constitutionally ineffective?
36. After grand jurors are sworn in, they are charged by the:
37. In the early years immediately following the adoption of the Sixth Amendment, guaranteeing the right to counsel, courts interpreted that right to mean:
38. What is the term used to describe lawyers willing to represent their clients at no charge?
39. According to the dual sovereignty doctrine:
40. Trials without juries, in which judges decide the facts, are called:
41. Detective Stanton gets a tip from John Bratton’s neighbor that Bratton is dealing drugs out of his house. Detective Stanton and a newly hired officer, Stankowitcz (awaiting to go to the academy) conduct surveillance and try to make undercover buys, unsuccessfully. Detective Stanton has bigger fish to fry and moves on. However, just a week after graduating from the academy newly minted Officer Stankowitcz decides to bust Bratton, whatever the cost. Officer Stankowitcz, knocks on Bratton’s door, and tells him he knows he is a dealer. He demands to search the house, but Bratton refuses. As Bratton pushes the door closed, Ocer Stankowitcz forces it open and steps in. He smells something awful. It was found out later, the City was getting complaints of foul odors in the neighborhood. Stankowitcz begins searching the house and doesn’t nd drugs but several decomposing bodies. It turns out Bratton is a serial killer. Two bodies are recovered from his basement. After being Mirandized properly, he leads officers to three other bodies, buried on several properties he used to rent. The police get warrants for the properties and retrieve the bodies. Additionally, Bratton’s ex-girlfriend tells police exactly where all the bodies were buried. However, the police mistakenly go to one property, which Bratton did not give them. They begin digging and find illegal guns, which turn out to belong to Sara Sutton, an illegal arms trader. Once this is discovered, officers obtain a warrant for Sutton’s house. They execute the warrant but forget to knock and announce. They find more illegal guns, and Sutton is charged. At the preliminary hearing, Bratton’s attorney objects to the mentioning of the evidence at the hearing and moves to suppress all of it as obtained illegally, stemming from Officer Stankowitcz’s illegal search. Sutton’s attorney also makes objections, claiming the search and seizure of the guns was illegal. As the prosecutor put in charge of both of these high prole cases, what exceptions to the exclusionary rule will you argue makes the evidence admissible?
42. Officer McDonald was on patrol one night. He pulled over a teenager on a bike. The teenager got mouthy. To teach him a lesson Officer McDonald put him in handcuffs and told him he was under arrest. Officer McDonald “tazed” him several times and then let him go. Teenager told his parents who immediately retained an attorney, who led a federal lawsuit against Officer McDonald. Explain how Officer McDonald can be sued in a federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.