Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
74 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Aaron is arrested for armed robbery. Prior to the filing of a formal charge, he is forced to appear in a police lineup where he is identified by Glenn, a witness to the robbery. Aaron is then charged with the crime and informed of his right to counsel. Does this procedure violate Aaron’s rights?
|
DEPENDS > Aaron has no right to counsel at pre-complaint lineups. However, the circumstances of the identification (composition of lineup, etc.) might indicate a violation of Aaron’s right to due process.
|
|
|
An accused is entitled to have counsel present at a post-arraignment identification from photographs. True or false?
|
FALSE > Identification from “mug shots” is proper without counsel being present.
|
|
|
Demi is identified in a post-complaint lineup by Wilson. Assuming Demi was not apprised of her right to counsel, can she automatically exclude any identification testimony by Wilson at the trial?
|
NO > While failure to provide counsel precludes admissibility of evidence of the lineup itself, it does not automatically exclude the testimony of a witness who identified the accused at the lineup. The witness’ in-court identification is valid if he can identify the accused at trial, without having to rely on the lineup identification.
|
|
|
Dotty is arrested on charges of participating in an extortion scheme. When Dotty is brought before a magistrate, she is ordered held without bail, and a hearing on probable cause for further detention is scheduled immediately. Does Dotty have a right to insist that the hearing be an adversary proceeding with counsel present?
|
NO > While such a hearing must be held, it can be a non-adversary proceeding without the presence of counsel.
|
|
|
Xavier is arrested for accepting bribes as a public official. Will his right to a preliminary hearing depend on whether the arrest was made before or after a grand jury indictment?
|
YES > In federal and most state courts, an arrest made after a grand jury indictment requires no preliminary examination (because the grand jury has already determined probable cause). If the arrest was before any indictment (or if it is a state where no grand jury is used), Xavier would be entitled to such an examination on the felony charge as long as no indictment is returned prior to preliminary examination.
|
|
|
Because preventive detention focuses on the safety of the community rather than the likely appearance of the Δ in court, it violates the Constitution. True or false?
|
FALSE > The Supreme Court has found that preventive detention does not violate the Due Process Clause or the Eighth ₳.
|
|
|
Tyler is arrested on a charge of embezzlement. Is Tyler entitled to a grand jury hearing and indictment before prosecution begins?
|
DEPENDS > If a federal felony is involved, Tyler has a Fifth ₳ right to a grand jury indictment. There is no (federal) constitution right to a grand jury indictment in state criminal prosecutions.
|
|
|
a. Assume that a grand jury is called in Tyler’s case. At the hearing, the prosecutor calls Witness Samantha, who purports to have overheard a conversation between Alex and Becky linking Tyler with the alleged crime. Can an indictment be handed down on the basis of Samantha’s testimony?
|
YES > The testimony would be sufficient because, in most jurisdictions, the indictment can be based entirely on hearsay.
|
|
|
b. May Tyler refuse to answer questions before the grand jury on grounds of possible self-incrimination?
|
YES > Unless Tyler has been granted immunity.
|
|
|
Dante is arrested for selling marijuana. At the preliminary hearing, the magistrate finds no probable cause. Is Dante acquitted of the charge?
|
NO > In most states, a finding of no probable cause by one magistrate does not preclude a prosecutor from presenting the case to another magistrate.
|
|
|
Drew is indicted for criminal trespass. If Drew is not brought to trial on the charge for 18 months, has his constitutional right to a speedy trial been violated?
|
DEPENDS > Mere length of delay does not establish unreasonableness (and hence a violation of Drew’s rights). The reasons for the delay, any assertion by Drew of his right to a speedy trial, and prejudice to Drew from the delay must also be considered. (Note that some statutes set forth specific time limits for the prosecution of criminal cases.)
|
|
|
Donna is indicted for making illegal campaign contributions. While investigating the crime, the prosecutor interviews Carol, who asserts that she made the contribution in Donna’s name “as a joke.” Neither Donna nor her atty knows about Carol or her comments. Must this evidence be disclosed to Donna?
|
YES > Such evidence is clearly favorable to Donna and would have to be made available even without a specific request.
|
|
|
An accused has no constitutional right to discovery of the prosecution’s case other than the right to exculpatory or mitigating evidence.
|
TRUE > However, federal and state statutes or decisional law may grant a right to pre-trial discovery by the defense.
|
|
|
Under present federal law, an accused is entitled to any physical evidence in the prosecutor’s possession.
|
FALSE > Although broad discovery is permitted under the federal rules, the Δ must show that such evidence is material to his defense.
|
|
|
The Δ in federal proceedings is never entitled to the pretrial stmts of witnesses for the prosecution.
|
FALSE > The accused would be entitled to disclosure of any exculpatory evidence in such stmts, even before trial.
|
|
|
An accused may be required to disclose the name and addresses of any alibi witnesses prior to trial if he intends to assert that defense.
|
TRUE > The Supreme Court has held that this reqmt does not violate Δ’s privilege against self-incrimination as long as the prosecution is also req’d to disclose any rebuttal witnesses it plans to call.
|
|
|
Δ was req’d to prove that he was not competent to stand trial. Did this reqmt violate the Constitution?
|
DEPENDS > Requiring the Δ to prove incompetency by a preponderance of the evidence satisfies due process, but requiring a higher standard of proof is unconstitutional.
|
|
|
Hinkley is arrested and charged with various offenses. Psychiatric examinations indicate that Hinkley is mentally incompetent to stand trial. May Hinkley be committed by the court until he is competent for this purpose?
|
NO > A Δ cannot be hospitalized indefinitely simply because he is found incompetent. Such a confinement can occur only following independent civil commitment proceedings.
|
|
|
Media coverage of a criminal trial without the Δ’s consent is an inherent denial of the Δ’s due process right. True or false?
|
FALSE > To establish a due process violation, the Δ must show that the media coverage (including tv or radio) had a prejudicial effect on the trial participants or comprised the jury’s ability to judge fairly.
|
|
|
Wilton is charged with breaking and entering and with rape. Can those offenses be tried together in a joint trial against Wilton?
|
DEPENDS > Two or more offenses may be charged as separate counts in the same indictment or information if the offenses are of the same character, or are based on the same act or txn or are parts of a common scheme or plan. Thus, if the two offenses were part of the same general conduct by Wilson (i.e., forcing entry to the rape victim’s residence), a joint trial might be appropriate.
|
|
|
A Δ tried before a non-attorney judge has been denied his right to a fair trial.
|
FALSE > A trial before lay judges is sometimes permissible.
|
|
|
In both state and federal courts, an accused is constitutionally entitled to a unanimous jury verdict.
|
FALSE > The Sixth ₳ imposes this reqmt on federal courts but not on state courts. However, if the state jury is as small as six persons, a unanimous verdict is req’d.
|
|
|
A Δ charged with an offense carrying a max penalty of $5k or five months in prison has no constitutional right to a trial by jury.
|
TRUE > Generally, the max potential sentence must be greater than six months’ imprisonment before there is a constitutional right to trial by jury.
|
|
|
After being given immunity, Witness Wagner is ordered by the court to testify in a forgery trial. Wagner refuses, and the judge orders Wagner jailed until he agrees to testify or until the end of the trial. Does this deny Wagner’s right to a jury trial?
|
NO > This is a civil contempt (because Witness Wagner can free himself by complying with the court order); and there is no right to a jury trial therefor.
|
|
|
A juror who opposes the death penalty might be excluded for cause in a capital case. True or false?
|
TRUE > Cause would exist if the juror indicated that his attitude might prevent him from following a court’s instructions.
|
|
|
Judge Jetson orders all members of the press barred from the courtroom during a particularly shocking segment of testimony in a murder trial. Can Sykes, a news reporter, successfully challenge the order?
|
YES > The media (and the public) have a First ₳ right to attend a criminal trial. Thus, a trial judge can order the trial closed only if there are specific findings that closure is necessary for a fair trial in the particular case.
|
|
|
An accused has a constitutional right to counsel in any type of criminal prosecution. True or false?
|
FALSE > The prosecution must be for an offense for which imprisonment is ultimately imposed.
|
|
|
An indigent Δ may obtain supplemental aid in preparing his defense. True or false?
|
TRUE > Such aid may be req’d under the Constitution if necessary for defense. In addition, many jurisdictions give the judge discretion to provide assistance other than counsel, such as medical experts, investigators, etc.
|
|
|
Xavier and Yuri are tried for participating in an armed robbery. May atty Zorba represent both Δs?
|
DEPENDS > If there is any conflict of interest between Xavier and Yuri (e.g., each blames the other, or an argument favorable to one may prejudice the other), Zorba’s dual representation may be improper.
|
|
|
After an information is filed, Alicia is called into court for arraignment. Is Alicia entitled to counsel at the arraignment?
|
YES > This is a “critical stage” of the proceedings, because Alicia must plead to the offense. Thus, Alicia is entitled to be represented by counsel (appointed, if necessary).
|
|
|
Is a Δ entitled to counsel at a preliminary hearing to determine probable cause?
|
YES > This has been deemed a “critical stage” of the proceedings, giving rise to a constitutional right to counsel.
|
|
|
Failure to provide counsel at any critical stage of a criminal proceeding results in an automatic reversal of conviction unless the Δ has waived his right. True or false?
|
FALSE > Failure to provide counsel at trial results in automatic reversal; a similar failure at other stages is judged by the “harmless error” standard.
|
|
|
At the time of arraignment, Dawn is informed by the court of her right to counsel. Dawn states that she does not want an atty but wishes to represent herself. Is this an effective waiver of her right?
|
NO > In addition to Dawn’s express waiver, the court must also determine that Dawn was competent to make the waiver – i.e., it must make sure that Dawn understands the consequences and difficulties of self-representation.
|
|
|
Δ wishes to present himself at trial. The court finds that Δ is competent to stand trial, but concludes that because of his poor educational background, he would not be capable of representing himself. Does the appointment of counsel over the Δ’s objection violate his constitutional rights?
|
YES > The Δ need not be found capable of representing himself, as his ability to present his case has no bearing on his decision to choose self-representation.
|
|
|
Suppose that, during trial, the defense atty enters no objections to the prosecutor’s offers of evidence, even though much of it is blatant and prejudicial hearsay. Has the Δ necessarily been denied effective counsel?
|
PROBABLY NOT > Failure to do what would appear to be good practice will not necessarily result in reversal of a conviction on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. If the atty fails to object to leading questions or hearsay evidence, Sixth ₳ right are not necessarily violated.
|
|
|
Carl, a criminal atty, is appointed to represent Tracy, an indigent Δ. Can Tracy successfully object to the appointment and request the appointment of Lawyer Linda?
|
NO > While indigent Δs have the right to appointed counsel, they do not have the right to select a particular atty.
|
|
|
Face-to-face testimonial encounters at trial are always req’d for live witnesses under the Confrontation Clause. True or false?
|
FALSE > The Supreme Court has held that the trial judge must balance the confrontational right against contrary policies, such as great injury to the witness.
|
|
|
Sawyer and Viola are brought to trial for the murder of Trinity following a poker game.
-During the prosecutor’s opening stmt, Sawyer interrupts with vocal denials despite the court’s warning to remain silent. May the judge thereupon order Sawyer excluded from the courtroom? -The prosecutor also seeks to introduce a prior confession by Viola that she “held Trinity while Sawyer worked her over.” The court admits the confession, although Viola never takes the stand at trial. Does this constitute error? -Would the result be different if Viola took the stand and denied any involvement by herself or Sawyer with the crime? |
Sawyer and Viola are brought to trial for the murder of Trinity following a poker game.
-YES > The court can order a Δ removed from court for disruptive conduct. -YES > This is the clearest case of a denial of Sawyer’s right of confrontation, and is not alleviated by a limiting instruction. -YES > Viola’s testimony satisfies Sawyer’s right of confrontation, so the prior confession can be used. |
|
|
For scientific evidence to be admissible, it must have gained general acceptance in the scientific community. True or false?
|
FALSE > The reqmt is that the court conclude that the evidence is reliable and will assist the trier of fact, not that it has gained general acceptance in the scientific community.
|
|
|
Drummond is charged with murder and pleads not guilty by reason of insanity. At the trial, Drummond’s atty introduces sufficient evidence to rebut the general presumption of sanity. Must the prosecution then prove Drummond’s sanity beyond a reasonable doubt?
|
SPLIT OF AUTHORITY > Some jurisdictions impose this burden on the prosecution; others require the Δ to prove insanity by a preponderance of the evidence or by clear and convincing evidence.
|
|
|
Δ was acquitted by reason of insanity, committed to a mental facility, and later determined to have recovered his sanity. Can the state continue to confine Δ indefinitely if he is unable to prove himself not dangerous to others?
|
NO > Such a commitment violates Δ’s constitutional rights if a showing is made that he has recovered his sanity.
|
|
|
Under the majority view, the question of police entrapment cannot be resolved by evidence of the Δ’s predisposition to commit the crime in question. True or false?
|
FALSE > The majority view does turn on predisposition, as well as the degree of inducement used by police.
|
|
|
Under the majority view, the predisposition of the Δ is determined prior to the govt’s initial contact with the Δ. True or false?
|
TRUE > Even if disposition is formed prior to the crime, it must have been present prior to the govt’s first contact with the Δ.
|
|
|
A plea of guilty or nolo contendere can be accepted if counsel for the accused assures the court that it is made voluntarily and with understanding of the charge and possible penalties. True or false?
|
FALSE > Δ must be personally addressed by the court, even though counsel is present.
|
|
|
Dustin pleads guilty to a charge of manslaughter, but refuses to admit guilt. May the court accept Dustin’s plea?
|
YES > Admission of guilt is not a constitutional prerequisite to imposition of a criminal penalty. If the state introduces strong evidence of the Δ’s guilt, and his voluntary plea appears to be an intelligent choice, the court may accept the plea even if the Δ refuses to admit guilt.
|
|
|
Darla is arraigned for grand theft. Prior to the arraignment, the prosecutor tells Darla that if she insists upon a trial, former convictions will be introduced to increase the seriousness of the offense. Darla therefore pleads guilty at the arraignment. Does this violate due process?
|
NO > Because the prosecutor has discretion to plead such prior convictions, this would not be a threat rendering Darla’s plea involuntary (hence it is not a violation of due process).
|
|
|
Assume instead that Darla pleads guilty because she knows that the police have seized stolen goods that link her to the theft. Later, it turns out that the goods were taken in an illegal search. Can Darla have the plea set aside?
|
DEPENDS > If Darla was represented by counsel when the plea was entered, and her lawyer failed to inform her of the possibility that the goods could be excluded, Darla can move to withdraw the plea as a product of ineffective assistance of counsel.
|
|
|
Nancy pleads guilty to an assault charge and is subsequently sentenced and imprisoned; Nancy later claims that she was pressured to make the plea. If she can show this, is she entitled to have the plea withdrawn?
|
PROBABLY NOT > Generally, a Δ may not collaterally attack her guilty plea after sentence if it represents a voluntary and intelligent choice among known alternatives.
|
|
|
Tim is tried and convicted for possession of heroin. During the trial, substantial evidence is presented to show that Tim is an indigent addict. May the court properly sentence Time to a prison term?
|
YES > While jailing a person merely for addiction may be “cruel and unusual punishment,” prohibited under the Constitution, imprisonment of an addict for possession is not.
|
|
|
Suppose Tim appeals the conviction and obtains a new trial. If Time is convicted again for the same offense, may the court impose a harsher sentence?
|
DEPENDS > There must be a showing of “new data” to justify a more severe sentence, unless the sentence is determined by a jury, or the state has a two-tier trial system.
|
|
|
Can Tim properly be given a sentence of “$5k or five years in prison”?
|
NO > Authorizing imprisonment as an alternative to payment of a fine (or a fine as a means of reducing the term of a prison sentence) violates equal protection if the Δ is indigent.
|
|
|
Maria is convicted of burglary. If Maria had appointed counsel, may the court condition her probation on re-pymt of costs of counsel?
|
YES > Indigent Δs may be req’d to pay back to the state the costs of their appointed counsel as a condition of probation. However, exemptions must be granted for those unable to pay back the costs.
|
|
|
A state may properly permit the death penalty to be imposed at the discretion of the judge (or jury) without providing guidelines, as long as the offenses to which it applies are clearly specified. True or false?
|
FALSE > A discretionary death penalty without guidelines is unconstitutional.
|
|
|
Can the state require consideration of a “victim impact stmt” during the sentencing phase of a capital case?
|
YES > The Supreme Court allows such stmts to be considered.
|
|
|
Does a statute imposing the death penalty satisfy constitutional reqmts if it contains language indicating that the killer displayed “utter disregard for human life”?
|
DEPENDS > Such a statute may be sufficiently clear for a capital offense if the state courts have narrowed and clarified it (e.g., stating that the statute will apply only when the killing was committed by a “cold-blooded, pitiless slayer”).
|
|
|
Can a Δ who was 16 years old at the time he committed a murder be sentenced to death?
|
NO > The Eighth ₳ is violated by the imposition of the death penalty on minors under the age of 17.
|
|
|
Δ is about to be sentenced. May new sentencing guidelines (adopted after Δ committed her crime) be used to increase her penalty?
|
NO > Retroactive application of such a change would have a disadvantageous impact on the Δ and so would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause.
|
|
|
An erroneous reasonable doubt instruction is subject to the harmless error rule. True or false?
|
FALSE > Because a reasonable doubt instruction is central to the jury process, it is always deemed to be prejudicial.
|
|
|
Dan, an indigent Δ, is convicted of grand theft in state court proceedings and desires to appeal. Must Dan be furnished a copy of the reporter’s transcript of trial?
|
PROBABLY > When a state grants the right to appeal, it cannot discriminate on the basis of poverty. If appellate review requires a transcript of the trial proceedings, such a transcript must be made available to convicted indigents free of charge. Thus, if this is an appeal as of right, and a transcript is req’d, Dan must be furnished a copy.
|
|
|
Suppose that Dan, an indigent, wishes to challenge his conviction in a habeas corpus proceeding. Is he entitled to appointed counsel for this purpose?
|
NO > An indigent has no constitutional right to appointed counsel to help perfect a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
|
|
|
A state court has no power to issue writs of habeas corpus.
|
FALSE > Both state and federal courts may issue the writ.
|
|
|
If a state prisoner sentenced to death claims “actual innocence” based on newly discovered evidence, he will be able to have his claim heard in a federal habeas corpus proceeding.
|
DEPENDS > The claim will be heard if it is accompanied by an assertion that the conviction is contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
Federal habeas corpus is not available to a state prisoner unless the petitioner has complied with the state procedural rules.
|
TRUE > Absent a showing of cause and actual prejudice, petitioners must comply with state procedural rules governing the manner in which federal constitutional claims must be raised.
|
|
|
In a federal habeas corpus proceeding based on a violation of Miranda, the trial judge may not consider the substantive Fifth ₳ claim, but may only look to whether the Δ was given a fair chance to raise the issue in state proceedings. True or false?
|
FALSE > The restriction placed on federal judges in the Fourth ₳ area does not apply in the self-incrimination context.
|
|
|
Deirdre, a 14-year old girl, is arrested for shoplifting and turned over to youth authorities for juvenile court proceedings. Does Deirdre have the right to a jury trial on the charge?
|
NO > The right to jury trial is inapplicable in juvenile matters.
|
|
|
School officials are gov’t agents, and therefore may not search public school students without probable cause and a valid warrant. True or false?
|
FALSE > School officials may conduct some searches without a warrant, based on reasonable suspicion.
|
|
|
Does a Δ have a right to counsel in all cases of probation revocation?
|
NO > In a probation revocation case, the Δ is entitled to counsel when the revocation also involves imposition of a new sentence. In other probation revocation cases, the right to counsel is determined on a case-by-case basis.
|
|
|
While incarcerated, Wilma is charged with misconduct in the prison and summoned before a prison disciplinary board for possible loss of “good time” credit. Is Wilma entitled to the assistance of counsel at this proceeding?
|
NO > While a prisoner in such proceedings has certain limited rights (e.g., to call witnesses on her own behalf), she has no right to counsel.
|
|
|
Fanny, a convicted felon, is released from prison on parole. Shortly thereafter, Fanny is arrested and charged with violating the conditions of her parole. Fanny argues that she did not commit the alleged violations. May she be returned to prison without a hearing?
|
NO > Fanny is entitled to a two-stage hearing: (1) A preliminary hearing on probable cause to detain her in custody while awaiting final disposition of the revocation, and (2) a subsequent revocation hearing.
|
|
|
May prisoners be treated against their will with antipsychotic drugs?
|
YES > The Constitution is satisfied if the prisoner has been found to be dangerous and the treatment is in his best interests.
|
|
|
Suppose Patience is brought to trial on a charge of possession of cocaine. Patience is convicted but has the verdict overturned on appeal. Can Patience be subjected to a second trial on the same offense?
|
DEPENDS > A Δ can be re-tried when the prior conviction is set aside on appeal because of errors committed during the trial. However, a Δ whose conviction is reversed because the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to sustain the conviction cannot be re-tried.
|
|
|
Jack is found guilty of murder and is sentenced to one year in prison. Does a successful gov’t appeal of this sentence violate the Double Jeopardy Clause?
|
NO > Such an appeal (on the ground that the sentence is too lenient) does not violate double jeopardy policies against multiple prosecutions or punishments for the same offense.
|
|
|
The gov’t can prosecute the Δ for conspiracy even though its earlier prosecuted her for crimes that are the alleged overt acts in connection with the conspiracy. True or false?
|
TRUE > Because the agreement is central to the crime of conspiracy, the earlier prosecution for the crimes that are the overt acts do not serve to bar a later prosecution for conspiracy under the Double Jeopardy Clause.
|
|
|
Terri is tried in state court for counterfeiting and is acquitted. Will this bar Terri’s subsequent prosecution for the same crime in federal court?
|
NO > Two separate governmental systems are involved, and acquittal on the state offense will not bar prosecution on the federal offense.
|
