Exam (elaborations)
LMPT 2301 4th Amendment Practice Exam – Questions & Correct Answers
- Course
- Institution
LMPT 2301 4th Amendment Practice Exam – Questions & Correct Answers
[Show more]
Content preview
LMPT 2301 4th Amendment Practice Exam – Questions& Correct Answers
1. Thompson is suspected of running a counterfeiting operation out of his
garage. The garage is attached to the dwelling. Without a warrant, three
officers step onto his curtilage, shine a flashlight into the garage, and take a
quick look. They observe a number of what appear to be $100 bills hanging
from a clothesline. Was the observation into the garage lawful?
a. No, because the officers physically intruded on a constitutionally protected
location without either a warrant or an exception to the 4th Amendment.
b. No, because the use of a flashlight violated Thompson's reasonable
expectation of privacy.
c. Yes, because the garage does not have curtilage because it is not a dwelling.
d. Yes, because the garage itself was not within the curtilage of Thompson's
dwelling. a. No, because the officers physically intruded on a
constitutionally protected location without either a warrant or an
exception to the 4th Amendment.
CORRECT: The root of the question says that the officers were on Thompson's
curtilage. The officers did not
have a warrant to be there and there is no 4th Amendment exception.
Accordingly, the observation was unlawful and the information they obtained
cannot be lawfully used to obtain a warrant.
b. No, because the use of a flashlight violated Thompson's reasonable
expectation of privacy.
INCORRECT: Using a flashlight, by itself, does not violate a person's REP.
c. Yes, because the garage does not have curtilage because it is not a dwelling.
,INCORRECT: Curtilage is not limited to dwellings and includes areas
surrounding a dwelling. (Review your
student text.)
d. Yes, because the garage itself was not within the curtilage of Thompson's
dwelling.
INCORRECT: The garage was attached to the house so it was very likely on the
curtilage. More importantly,
the officers were unlawfully on the curtilage when they made their
observations.
2. Agents develop reasonable suspicion that Wooster is operating a stolen
credit card ring. Upon seeing Wooster driving in his car one afternoon, the
agents follow him. When he arrives at a shopping mall, the agents approach
him, identify themselves, and tell him to put his hands on his automobile. One
of the agents frisks him and, in the upper left hand pocket, feels what is
immediately apparent to him as a stack of credit cards bound by a rubber
band. The agent removes the credit cards and, ultimately, determines that
they are stolen. Wooster's motion to suppress the credit cards will be -
a. Denied, because the agents had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
b. Denied, because the agents had probable cause to remove the cards from
his pocket under the "plain touch" doctrine.
c. Granted, because the agents performed an illegal "frisk" of Wooster.
d. Granted, because a "frisk" may result only in the discovery 4th
Amendment Practice Exam
2
2. Agents develop reasonable suspicion that Wooster is operating a stolen
credit card ring. Upon seeing Wooster driving in his car one afternoon, the
agents follow him. When he arrives at a shopping mall, the agents approach
,him, identify themselves, and tell him to put his hands on his automobile. One
of the agents frisks him and, in the upper left hand pocket, feels what is
immediately apparent to him as a stack of credit cards bound by a rubber
band. The agent removes the credit cards and, ultimately, determines that
they are stolen. Wooster's motion to suppress the credit cards will be -
a. Denied, because the agents had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
b. Denied, because the agents had probable cause to remove the cards from
his pocket under the "plain touch" doctrine.
c. Granted, because the agents performed an illegal "frisk" of Wooster.
d. Granted, because a "frisk" may result only in the discovery of weapons on a
suspect.
a. Denied, because the agents had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
INCORRECT: The officers only had reasonable suspicion criminal activity was
afoot which would allow them to make a Terry stop and direct Wooster out of
his car. The officers did not have reasonable suspicion that Wooster was
presently armed and dangerous making the Terry frisk illegal. The crime of
operating a stolen credit card ring is not the type of offense which would give
R/S a person is presently armed and dangerous (like one would have with R/S
someone committed a robbery or burglary.)
b. Denied, because the agents had probable cause to remove the cards from
his pocket under the "plain touch" doctrine.
INCORRECT: The Terry frisk was illegal. (See a above.) The credit cards were
discovered during an illegal frisk. If the officers had R/S Wooster was
presently armed and da
3. Johnson is arrested for drunk driving and failing to pay child support. He
agrees to share information with the police to avoid prosecution. Having been
personally involved in every aspect of an ongoing stolen paycheck operation,
Johnson explained the intimate details to the police of what he saw and did
, with Fred, a co-criminal. Based on his statements alone, the officers seek a
search warrant for the co-criminal's premises where Johnson stated he saw
many of the stolen checks the day before. Can Johnson's statement alone
establish Probable Cause to support a warrant application?
a. Yes, because Johnson's statements amount to probable cause under a
totality of the circumstances using the Illinois v. Gates test.
b. Yes, because Johnson has never provided false information to the officers in
the past.
c. No, because the officers did not corroborate Johnson's statements.
d. No, because statements alone can never est a. Yes, because Johnson's
statements amount to probable cause under a totality of the circumstances
using the Illinois v. Gates test.
CORRECT: The information known to the officers show both that Johnson was
reliable and had a basis of knowledge in what he told the officers.
Furthermore, because he is a co-criminal, the information he provided is
presumed reliable. Under a totality of the circumstances this is enough to
establish probable cause.
b. Yes, because Johnson has never provided false information to the officers in
the past.
INCORRECT: Even if true, this would go to Johnson's reliability. It would not,
however, establish a basis of knowledge. This alone is not enough.
c. No, because the officers did not corroborate Johnson's statements.
INCORRECT: Because the Gates test was satisfied (reliability and basis of
knowledge under a totality of the circumstances) there was no requirement to
corroborate the information.
d. Denied, because statements alone can never establish probable cause.
INCORRECT: A statement from an informant if it is reliable under the totality
of the circumstances test established in Illinois v Gates.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Zendaya. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $28.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
76747 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now