Get Solved CJUS 410 Quiz The Constitution

Get Solved CJUS 410 Quiz The Constitution

CJUS 410 Quiz: The Constitution, Criminal Procedure, Searches and Seizures

Module 1: Week 1 — Module 2: Week 2

1. Which of the following refers to the concept of using no more state power and resources than are needed to prevent, investigate, prosecute, sentence, and review social actions taken to provide for the ideals of public safety and individual autonomy?
2. The case of S. v. Apple provides the opportunity to see which of the following ideals, as it’s beginning to play out in the courts?
3. In passing the All Writs Act, Congress gave courts a means of ensuring that:
4. What entity can impeach a district court judge?
5. Directing a company to assist law enforcement agents in enabling a search is known as an order to:
6. What criminal procedure ideal is best stated as avoiding two “errors of justice?”
7. In February 2016, which company wrote a letter to its customers, stating its commitment to protecting their personal information?
8. What courts are the general trial courts of the U.S. court system?
9. A proceeding that addresses a motion to throw out evidence in a trial is called:
10. The term “parallel rights” refers to:
11. The ultimate source of American criminal procedure law is:
12. The due process revolution occurred:
13. The cases of Powell v. Alabama (1932) and Brown v. Mississippi (1936) established what came to be known as:
14. In Mapp v. Ohio (1961), the Court applied which of the following to states?
15. Which amendment to the Constitution forbids a government appeal of a verdict of “not guilty”?
16. Court opinions refer to past cases to back up their reasoning and their decision in the present case. What are these prior decisions called?
17. The total incorporation doctrine:
18. The political, dualistic nature of the Supreme Court refers to its commitment to two connecting ideals: fundamental law and:
19. One interpretation of selective incorporation is that:
20. The two landmark cases that began the federal government’s gradual entry into state criminal justice were Powell v. Alabama (1932) and:
21. The “presumption of regularity” posits that:
22. The power of a court to hear and decide cases in a specific geographical area or to deal with a specific subject is called:
23. If an appellate court upholds the decision of a lower court, then the decision has been:
24. In order to claim a violation of the equal protection clause, a claimant must prove that:
25. The two-pronged test of privacy to determine whether a police action is actually a “search” is referred to as the:
26. Until 1967, SCOTUS denied searches mainly according to property law. According to the _______________, to qualify as a search, officers had to physically invade a “constitutionally protected area.”
27. SCOTUS has not yet decided if searches of certain types of technology constitute Fourth Amendment searches. Which of the following has not been addressed by SCOTUS?
28. In Illinois v. Caballes (2005), SCOTUS held that what amendment did not apply to a drug-sting dog alerting on a car trunk?
29. In what case did SCOTUS decide that attaching a GPS receiver and monitoring a Jeep Grand Cherokee was a Fourth Amendment search?
30. Which of the following is one of the types of crime that searches and seizures were originally intended to combat?
31. In what case did the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision that the searches of a laptop computer, a cell phone, and an ash drive were private searches (searches conducted by private parties not associated with the government)?
32. In S. v. Galpin (2009), the court addresses the issue of reasonable expectation of privacy in computer law and compares a computer to which of the following?
33. An individual person’s expectation of privacy is called:
34. In what case did the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decide there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in private emails?
35. What is the second question in the three main steps in Fourth Amendment analyses?
36. According to the SCOTUS opinion in S. v. White (1971), involving a friend wired for sound for the police:
37. In Kyllo v. U.S. (2001), SCOTUS ruled that the discovery and measurement of which of the following from a home was a Fourth Amendment search?
38. In California v. Greenwood (1988), SCOTUS held that:
39. SCOTUS has held that citizens, under certain circumstances, have no reasonable expectation of privacy in which of the following?
40. What doctrine holds that, whenever we knowingly reveal our incriminating secrets, we assume the risk that our false friends will use them against us in criminal cases?
41. Chief Bryan Jenks has a problem. Many car burglaries are occurring in his town, in alleys. The mayor is up for reelection, and the community is demanding action. They want the burglars arrested and convicted, no matter the cost. The mayor has demanded that all police resources be put into catching criminals. He even has proposed a curfew of 6 pm be imposed citywide on all people except first responders. Before 6 pm, he wants all people walking in alleys stopped and identified. He would like the Constitutional requirements for arrest and conviction lessened, until the burglars are caught, as well. What should Chief Jenks tell the mayor in light of the “criminal Procedure ideals in the real world”?
42. John Hamm broke into a house, hit the homeowner over the head, and stole jewelry, a gun, a laptop, and credit cards. The homeowner was treated and released. Hamm was arrested by police two blocks from the house, based on the description given by the homeowner. Hamm was initially arrested on charges of aggravated burglary and aggravated robbery. At the arraignment, the judge asked him, “How do you plead to the charges against you”. Hamm says, “I’m not sure because I have not been told what I’m charged with.” Tersely, the judge states, “You know what you did, just before the cops caught you”?! Hamm says, “Well I know, I did wrong, but I’m not sure what crimes I’m guilty of. I would also like to talk to an attorney and ask some questions of those making these accusations against me.” The judge says, “Our upstanding police are making the acquisitions. Their word is ‘gold’ in this courtroom. And, you just confessed in my opinion, and that confession is good enough for me. I nd you guilty of aggravated burglary and aggravated robbery. I sentence you to death by hanging, at 0400 tomorrow.” The judge banged his gavel and ordered the bailiff to remove John Hamm from his courtroom immediately. An attorney in the Courtroom stands up and says, “Judge, you just violated all of Mr. Hamm’s due process rights. The judge says, “This ain’t no federal court, so we don’t have to follow the Bill of Rights. Now sit down before I throw you in jail for contempt”! From the above scenario dene and discuss, in relation to the scenario, the concept of applying “Due Process” to the states, via the doctrines of “Fundamental Fairness and selective and total Incorporation.”