Criminal Law And Procedure for the Paralegal 2nd Edition by Neal R. Bevans – Test Bank
To Purchase this Complete Test Bank with Answers Click the link Below
If face any problem or
Further information contact us At tbzuiqe@gmail.com
Sample Test
1
TEST BANK
Chapter 1
An Introduction to Criminal Law
Multiple Choice
1.
Which of the following is not true about the distinction
between civil and criminal law?
1.
The purpose of civil law is to compensate victims
who have been injured by the actions of others.
2.
The purpose of criminal law is to discourage
behavior that society has deemed to be undesirable.
3.
The purpose of civil law is to imprison wrongdoers.
1.
Criminal cases are brought by the state.
2.
Which of the following is true about civil cases
and criminal cases?
1.
Civil cases must be proven beyond a reasonable
doubt.
1.
Criminal cases are not brought by the state.
1.
A civil case can be based on the same facts as a
criminal case.
1.
All of the above are true statements.
3.
“Separation of powers” is a clause of the U.S.
Constitution that provides that
1.
the actions of each branch will be reviewed by the
other branches.
1.
the duties and obligations of one branch cannot be
infringed upon by another branch.
1.
the executive branch can only exercise its powers
in limited situations.
1.
only two out of three branches of government have
actual power.
4.
All of the following are branches of the
government, except the
1.
executive branch.
1.
judicial branch.
1.
legislative branch.
1.
administrative branch.
5.
The burden of proof in a criminal case is
1.
beyond all doubt.
1.
beyond a shadow of a doubt.
1.
beyond a reasonable doubt.
1.
to a mathematical certainty.
6.
The burden of proof in a civil case is
1.
beyond a reasonable doubt.
1.
beyond a mere doubt.
1.
preponderance of the evidence.
1.
preponderance of persuasion.
2
7.
Most crimes fall under the jurisdiction of
1.
state law.
1.
federal law.
1.
administrative law.
1.
none of the above.
8.
A person can be sued civilly
1.
only after any criminal case based on the same
facts has been disposed of.
1.
before a criminal case is brought.
1.
after a criminal case is brought.
1.
both b and c.
9.
The power of a court to make rulings and enter
judgments in specific categories of cases is
1.
1.
1.
1.
10.
When the president vetoes legislation proposed by
Congress, this is an example of
1.
separation of powers.
1.
judicial function.
1.
checks and balances.
1.
separation of church and state.
True/False
1.
The Fourth Amendment governs arrests.
2.
An arrest must be supported by probable cause.
3.
In some states, a citizen has the power to detain a
person who has committed a crime.
4.
A police officer must physically touch a person
before he or she is considered under arrest.
5.
A person is under arrest when he or she believes
that an arrest has occurred.
6.
The degree of proof needed for probable cause is
the same as required to prove a person guilty of the crime.
7.
Probable cause is required when an officer briefly
detains a person.
8.
In some situations, a police officer is authorized
to actually pat down the outer clothing of an individual the officer has briefly
detained.
9.
There is a preference at law for a warrant over
warrantless arrests and seizures.
10.
An officer has a search warrant authorizing seizure
of narcotics, but during the search he finds evidence of another crime. He is
permitted to seize it, even though it is not mentioned in the search warrant.
3
Chapter 2
Arrest, Search and Seizure
Multiple Choice
1.
The standard that law enforcement must show to
justify an arrest is
1.
reasonable suspicion.
1.
reasonable grounds.
1.
probable cause.
1.
proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
2.
In which of the following scenarios is probable
cause not required?
1.
The arrest of a suspected drug dealer
1.
The search of a suspected murderer’s home
1.
When consent is given
1.
When the suspect is clearly evasive
3.
All of the following are considered to be specific
acts that can give rise to probable cause, except
1.
police description over the radio.
1.
prior run-ins with the suspect.
1.
suspicious or unusual behavior.
1.
information provided by a citizen.
4.
Danny is an off-duty police officer who sees a man
parked outside a closed jewelry store. He has a strong gut feeling that the man
is up to something, so he asks the man to step out of his car, cuffs him, and
transports him to headquarters. Which of the following is true about this
scenario?
1.
It is a valid arrest.
1.
It is an improper arrest because Danny was
off-duty.
1.
It is an improper arrest because Danny cannot
arrest based on a “hunch.”
1.
It is an improper arrest because Danny should not have
been near the jewelry store.
5.
All of the following are exceptions to the search
warrant requirement, except
1.
administrative searches.
1.
evidence found in trash.
1.
evidence dropped by a fleeing suspect.
1.
evidence discovered after a valid consent.
6.
Carl is stopped at the U.S. border between Mexico
and the United States. Border patrol officers become suspicious about his
contradictory answers about where he was in Mexico. They ask for consent to
search and Carl refuses. The officers inform him that they have a drug-sniffing
dog on hand, who can sniff out illegal narcotics. They again ask for consent
and Carl again refuses. They bring in the dog who immediately scratches at
Carl’s spare tire. This is how the dog indicates the presence of illegal
narcotics. They open the tire and find a kilo of cocaine. Is this a valid
search?
4
1.
No, because there was no legal basis for the use of
the dog.
1.
No, because the search was carried out over Carl’s
objection.
1.
Yes, because there was a valid consent.
1.
Yes, because there was sufficient probable cause
after the dog scratched at the tire.
7.
Police stake out Carl’s house because they suspect
that he is growing marijuana under special lights in his basement. They have a
special camera that allows them to read the heat signature of these special
lights. Carl’s basement shows that such lights are being used. Do they have
sufficient probable cause for a search?
1.
Yes, because of Carl’s use of the lights.
1.
No, because the use of the camera violated Carl’s
right to privacy.
1.
Yes, because Carl is a known drug dealer.
1.
No, because Carl’s house is located on a private
street.
8.
A search warrant can become “stale” and no longer
legally effective when
1.
too much time has elapsed since it was issued.
1.
the warrant refers to items that are not yet in the
jurisdiction.
1.
the judge refuses to issue the warrant.
1.
all of the above.
9.
Danny obtains a warrant to search a local warehouse
for “any evidence of illegal activity.” He discovers some marijuana in an
employee’s locker. At trial, the employee challenges the seizure on the grounds
that it was unconstitutional. Is it?
1.
No, because Danny had a valid warrant, signed by
the judge.
1.
No, because the warrant stated that Danny could search
for evidence of illegal activity.
1.
Yes, because the warrant was too vague.
1.
Yes, because there was no proof that Danny knew the
identity of the employee.
10.
Danny stops Carl on the street and asks Carl some
questions. Danny doesn’t like Carl’s answers and tells him so. Carl wants to
walk away. Can he?
1.
No, because he is under arrest.
1.
Yes, because Danny had no right to ask him
questions in the first place.
1.
No, because he is a reasonable person who believe
that he was under arrest.
1.
Yes, because he is not under arrest and Danny has
no probable cause to detain him further.
True/False
1.
A paralegal can be disbarred for violating ethical
rules.
2.
When an appellate court orders a new trial, this
trial is carried out in the appellate court itself.
3.
The grand jury is responsible for indicting a
person suspected of committing a crime.
4.
Shortly after his or her arrest, a suspect is
brought before a judge in a hearing called a sentencing hearing.
5
5.
At trial, the prosecution is represented by the
police officer.
6.
The prosecutor is employed in the same branch of
government as the judge.
7.
Another way of charging a person is to use an
accusation (information).
8.
A person can plead the Fifth Amendment as a way of refusing
to answer incriminating statements before the grand jury.
9.
When the grand jury approves further prosecution,
they issue a “true bill.”
10.
The purpose of the initial appearance is to verify
that the right person was arrested and to see if the defendant needs an
attorney.
6
Chapter 3
Post Arrest and Grand Jury
Multiple Choice
1.
The grand jury is composed of how many people?
1.
12
1.
14
1.
6
1.
23
2.
What is the purpose of the grand jury?
1.
To decide guilt or innocence
1.
To inform the defendant of the charges against him
1.
To determine if there is sufficient probable cause
to continue the prosecution
1.
To sentence the defendant
3.
What is the official charging document issued by
the grand jury?
1.
Indictment
1.
Accusation
1.
Warrant
1.
Order
4.
What is the difference between a felony and a
misdemeanor?
1.
A felony is punishable by no more than twelve
months in custody, whereas a misdemeanor is punishable by greater than one year
in custody.
2.
A felony sentence can be one year or more, whereas
a misdemeanor sentence is usually twelve months or less.
3.
A felony involves any crime dealing with theft,
whereas misdemeanors involve violent crimes.
4.
People who are sentenced to misdemeanors cannot pay
fines, whereas those who are sentenced to felonies must pay fines.
5.
When an attorney’s license to practice law is
revoked, this is called
1.
1.
1.
1.
6.
What is the most common reason for an attorney to
be disbarred?
1.
Theft of client funds
1.
Conviction for felony offense
1.
Possession of narcotics
1.
Entering a guilty plea for a client without the
client’s consent
7
7.
The person who passes sentence on the convicted defendant
is the
1.
1.
1.
victim-witness advocate.
1.
8.
On appeal an appellate court is only allowed three
actions. Which of the following actions is not authorized?
1.
Affirm
1.
Hear new testimony
1.
Remand
1.
Reverse
9.
The purpose of a preliminary hearing is
1.
to determine the defendant’s guilt or innocence.
1.
to determine if there is probable cause to support
the defendant’s arrest.
1.
to sentence the defendant.
1.
to compensate the victim.
10.
During a preliminary hearing, the prosecutor asks
for testimony that is clearly hearsay. The defense attorney objects. What will
result?
1.
The testimony will be admitted because the
evidentiary rules are much more relaxed at preliminary hearings.
2.
The testimony will be excluded because the
evidentiary rules are higher than at trial.
1.
The testimony will be admitted because hearsay is
always admissible.
1.
The testimony will be excluded because the
prosecutor is not permitted to ask such a question in the first place.
True/False
1.
A lawyer can offer an opinion to the jury about the
facts in a case.
2.
When witnesses are on the stand, they should tell
the jury about their personal opinion about the facts of the case.
3.
Testimony is not evidence; it is opinion.
4.
A lawyer can vouch for a witness’s credibility.
5.
Identical twins have the same fingerprints.
6.
Identical twins have the same DNA.
7.
In some situations, DNA can be recovered from
tissue and other objects years after it was left behind.
8
8.
When DNA evidence is corrupted, it can give a false
indication that someone else committed the crime.
9.
Blood tests are just as informative as DNA tests.
10.
Eyewitness testimony has been shown to be
chronically unreliable.
9
Chapter 4
Evidentiary Issues in Prosecution
Multiple Choice
1.
What is the primary difference between direct and
circumstantial evidence?
1.
Direct evidence is admissible; circumstantial is
not.
1.
A case can be based entirely on direct evidence,
but not entirely on circumstantial evidence.
2.
Direct evidence is a fact; circumstantial evidence
suggests a fact.
1.
There is no difference between direct and
circumstantial evidence.
2.
What are the sanctions for an improper lineup?
1.
The officer can be fined.
1.
The judge can order a reduced sentence.
1.
The prosecutor could be fined.
1.
The evidence will not be admitted.
3.
What is “chain of custody”?
1.
The link between the defendant and his or her term
of incarceration
1.
The link between the evidence and who possessed it
1.
The connecting chain of events leading to the
defendant’s arrest
1.
The proof necessary to convict the defendant
4.
What are “foundation questions”?
1.
Questions of the witness to show his or her
knowledge of the subject matter
1.
Questions of the defendant to show his or her
degree of guilt
1.
Questions of a witness to show the relevancy of
evidence
1.
Questions of the jury to determine guilt or
innocence of the accused
5.
During Carl’s interrogation, he takes a polygraph
test. The results of the test indicate deception. Will the jury be permitted to
view these results?
1.
Yes, because they occurred during a legal
interrogation.
1.
Yes, because Carl was under arrest at the time of
the test.
1.
No, because Carl was not aware of the legal
ramifications of the test.
1.
No, because polygraph results are not admissible.
6.
A suspect’s skin and blood are discovered at the
scene of the crime. The DNA is run through the FBI’s DNA database and a
positive match results, showing that the tissue belongs to Carl Doe. Will this
evidence be admissible at trial?
1.
No, because it is circumstantial evidence.
1.
No, because Carl did not consent to having this
sample run through the database.
1.
Yes, because DNA evidence cannot be challenged.
1.
Yes, because it shows that Carl was present at the
scene.
10
7.
After Carl’s arrest, his appointed counsel informs
him that the police want to stage a live, physical lineup. Carl is brought to a
room where there is a one-way mirror and several other people who look more or
less like Carl. However, just before the lineup, Carl’s attorney is prevented
from attending. The victim positively identifies Carl as the attacker. Will
this identification be admitted at trial?
1.
Yes, because the lineup was constitutionally valid.
1.
Yes, because Carl’s attorney had no right to be
present.
1.
No, because Carl did not consent to the lineup.
1.
No, because Carl’s attorney had the right to be
present.
8.
Carl is stopped on the street, handcuffed, and then
taken back to a waiting patrol car. The officer shoves Carl’s face against the
glass window and asks the person in the back seat, “Is this the man who
attacked you?” The witness says yes and Carl is arrested. Is this
identification admissible at trial?
1.
Yes, because Carl was validly arrested.
1.
Yes, because the witness identified Carl.
1.
No, because Carl was not read his Miranda
1.
No, because it was an impermissible “show-up.”
9.
Who has the final say on the weight to be given any
particular piece of evidence?
1.
The jury
1.
The judge
1.
The prosecutor
1.
The defense attorney
10.
A judge rules that certain evidence is
“admissible.” What does this mean?
1.
The evidence establishes the defendant’s guilt.
1.
The jury will be allowed to hear/see the evidence.
1.
The prosecution’s evidence is better than that of
the defense.
1.
The jury will not be allowed to hear/see the
evidence.
True/False
1.
Carl is arrested, but no one reads him his Miranda His
arrest is illegal and he will be set free.
2.
Miranda rights are a requirement imposed by federal statutes.
3.
During his interrogation, Carl asks to speak with
his lawyer. The police can continue to question him.
4.
During his interrogation, the police lie to Carl,
telling him that his fingerprints were found at the scene. This is a
permissible tactic.
5.
In order to fool Carl, the police have him sign a
document that purports to be a “Release of Suspect’s Property,” when in fact it
is a consent to search form. This is a permissible tactic.
11
6.
Carl decides to give a voluntary statement to the
police. No one reads him his Miranda Carl’s statement can be
admitted at trial.
7.
During his interrogation, police promise Carl that
if he confesses to committing the crime, the judge will only give him probation
and a fine. Carl confesses. This confession was obtained unconstitutionally.
8.
During his interrogation, police threaten Carl with
being locked up without food and water until he confesses. Carl confesses. The
confession was obtained unconstitutionally.
9.
During his interrogation, police offer to speak
with the judge and tell the judge that Carl was cooperative. Carl subsequently confesses.
The statement is unconstitutional.
10.
Psychological profiling of a suspect is
unconstitutional.
12
Chapter 5
Interrogation, Confessions, and Miranda
Comments
Post a Comment