CRIMPRO flashcards

All 20 cards

1. Card 1

   DEFINITION: What are the three foundational constitutional amendments most commonly enforced through the exclusionary rule in criminal cases?

   The three foundational amendments most commonly enforced through the exclusionary rule are the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures; the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits compelled self-incrimination; and the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the right to counsel.

2. Card 2

   Explain the primary purpose of the exclusionary rule as established by the courts.

   The exclusionary rule is a procedural rule of federal constitutional law created by the courts primarily to deter unlawful police conduct. It is not intended as a personal remedy for a defendant's constitutional violation, but rather to prevent future violations by law enforcement.

3. Card 3

   Which of the following is NOT an exception to the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine?

   D) Good faith reliance on a defective warrant. While good faith is an exception to the exclusionary rule itself, it is not listed as an exception to the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine, which focuses on purging the taint of illegally obtained evidence through independent source, inevitable discovery, or attenuation.

4. Card 4

   Why does a defendant need 'standing' to raise a Fourth Amendment violation and seek suppression of evidence?

   A defendant needs standing because the Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures of their own person, houses, papers, and effects. Therefore, the defendant must personally be the victim of the police's unreasonable conduct and have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the invaded place or item to challenge the violation.

5. Card 5

   DEFINITION: Define the 'Fruit of the Poisonous Tree' doctrine.

   The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine dictates that any additional evidence (oral statements, physical objects) acquired directly or indirectly from an illegal arrest, search, or seizure is excluded as tainted fruit of the original illegality. This extends beyond the directly illegally obtained evidence to subsequent evidence derived from it.

6. Card 6

   How does the Supreme Court's 'balancing approach' influence the application of the exclusionary rule?

   The Supreme Court uses a balancing approach by weighing the deterrent benefit of excluding evidence against the social cost of allowing potentially guilty defendants to go free and excluding reliable evidence. If the deterrent benefit is small and the social cost is high, the Court is less likely to apply the exclusionary rule, reflecting its view of the rule as a deterrent tool rather than an automatic personal right.

7. Card 7

   Which of the following is a factor considered in determining if attenuation purges the taint of an illegal detention, according to Brown v. Illinois?

   B) The temporal proximity of the arrest and the confession. Brown v. Illinois factors include whether Miranda warnings were given, temporal proximity, presence of intervening circumstances, and the purpose and flagrancy of official misconduct.

8. Card 8

   DEFINITION: What is a 'Franks hearing' and what must a defendant prove to be entitled to one?

   A Franks hearing is a proceeding where a defendant challenges the truthfulness of a warrant affidavit. To be entitled to one, the defendant must make a substantial preliminary showing that the affidavit contained false statements or material omissions made intentionally, knowingly, or in reckless disregard for the truth, and that these statements or omissions were material to the magistrate's probable cause finding.

9. Card 9

   Explain how an intervening arrest warrant can attenuate the connection between an illegal stop and subsequently obtained evidence.

   When police make an unconstitutional investigatory stop but then discover a valid outstanding arrest warrant, the warrant's discovery can attenuate the connection. The valid preexisting arrest warrant is considered a significant intervening circumstance, independent of the illegal stop, thus weakening the link between the initial illegality and the evidence seized during a lawful search incident to arrest.

10. Card 10

    Under what circumstances does the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule NOT apply?

    A) Police lie or mislead the court. The good faith exception does not apply when police lie or mislead the court, the magistrate is not neutral or detached, or no reasonable police officer would have believed the warrant valid.

11. Card 11

    DEFINITION: What is the 'harmless error rule' in the context of improperly admitted illegally obtained evidence?

    The harmless error rule states that if illegally obtained evidence is improperly admitted at trial, the conviction is not automatically reversed. An appellate court will affirm the conviction if the government proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the improperly admitted evidence did not contribute to the conviction, meaning the defendant would likely have been convicted even without it.

12. Card 12

    How does the Fourth Amendment apply to actions by private parties versus government actors?

    The Fourth Amendment applies only to government conduct, not private conduct. When a private party, acting on their own, acquires evidence that the government later seeks to introduce, the Fourth Amendment and exclusionary rule are not triggered. However, if a private party acts at the direction of a government agent or pursuant to an official policy, their actions become subject to Fourth Amendment scrutiny.

13. Card 13

    Which of the following is generally NOT required for an arrest in a public place?

    B) An arrest warrant. Arrest warrants are generally not required before arresting someone in a public place, provided the police have probable cause. However, an arrest warrant is typically required for a nonemergency arrest in an individual's own home.

14. Card 14

    DEFINITION: What is the two-step approach adopted by the Supreme Court to determine if a person is in 'custody' for Miranda purposes?

    The two-step approach involves first ascertaining whether, in light of objective circumstances, a reasonable person would have felt they were not at liberty to terminate the interrogation and leave. Second, it determines whether the relevant environment presents the same inherently coercive pressures as a station house questioning, considering factors like location, duration, and restraints.

15. Card 15

    Explain the 'objective circumstances' principle in determining custody for Miranda purposes.

    The objective circumstances principle means that custody is determined based on what a reasonable person in the suspect's position would believe, rather than on the subjective views or actual mindset of either the interrogating officers or the person being questioned. This ensures a consistent standard for evaluating freedom of movement.

16. Card 16

    Which of the following is NOT a source of probable cause for an arrest?

    C) An informant's tip lacking specific details and reliability confirmation. Probable cause may be obtained indirectly through an informant only if reliability is established by specific details and confirmation of both the details and the informant prior to arrest.

17. Card 17

    DEFINITION: When is an arrest warrant required for an arrest in a home?

    An arrest warrant is required before police can arrest an individual in her own home, absent exigent circumstances or consent. This rule protects the sanctity of the home from warrantless intrusions.

18. Card 18

    Under what circumstances might a warrantless in-home arrest be justified?

    A warrantless in-home arrest may be justified by exigent circumstances, such as when an arrest attempt outside the home is thwarted because the suspect retreats inside, when there is insufficient time to secure a warrant because delay would allow the suspect to evade arrest or destroy evidence, or when the arresting officer is in hot pursuit and has probable cause.

19. Card 19

    Police generally may not search for the subject of an arrest warrant in the home of a third party without first obtaining what?

    C) A search warrant. Police generally may not search for the subject of an arrest warrant in the home of a third party absent exigent circumstances or consent, without first obtaining a search warrant for that third-party home.

20. Card 20

    Why is an unlawful arrest not a defense to a subsequent conviction of the crime charged?

    An unlawful arrest, while potentially leading to the suppression of evidence obtained as a result of that illegality through the exclusionary rule, does not automatically invalidate the subsequent conviction for the crime itself. The illegality of the arrest does not negate the fact that a crime may have been committed, and the focus shifts to whether the evidence used for conviction was admissible.

More flashcard decks

• Thermochemistry and Thermodynamics flashcards (149 cards)
• Género Bacillus y Clostridium flashcards (100 cards)
• Ψηφιακά Παιχνίδια και Μάθηση flashcards (100 cards)
• Philosophy AS flashcards (100 cards)
• Nervous system flashcards (100 cards)
• ECG, IGEL and Iv flashcards (100 cards)

Browse every shared deck