Criminal Procedure GPSTC 320/321 Exam Questions
With Correct Answers
Weeks v. US - Answer-Case law that established exclusionary rule, evidence gotten
without a warrant isn't admissible in a *federal court*
Lottery tickets were seized from a home without a SW
/.Wolfe v. Colorado (1949) - Answer-FEDS would go to *local* officers and make them
obtain evidence because the exclusionary rule did not apply to local and state officers
also known as *Silver Platter Doctrine* - was ultimately struck down
/.Mapp v. Ohio (1961) - Answer-Extended the Exclusionary Rule to the states,
increasing the protections for defendants.
Illegally obtained evidence could not be used in state, county, and local govt
Searched Mapp's house with a fake SW for gambling stuff but she had porn (obscene
materials) in her house
/.Government Action - Answer-Any action taken by government officials and their
agents (the po-po)
/.Exclusionary Rule _________ - Answer-only applies to government action
/.The Exclusionary Rule prohibits the following: - Answer-1. The introduction of evidence
seized during an unlawful search
2. Testimony concerning knowledge acquired from that unlawful search
3. Derivative evidence that flowed from the unlawful search
/.Exclusionary Rule Exceptions - Answer-good faith
inevitable discovery
purged taint
independent source
/.The Good Faith Exception : - Answer-An exception to the exclusionary rule, holding
that evidence seized on the basis of a mistakenly issued search warrant can be
introduced at trial if the mistake was made in good faith, that is, if all the parties involved
had reason at the time to believe that the warrant was proper.
*not applicable in GA*
/.independent source exception - Answer-the essential aspect is the existence of
evidence which was not illegally seized and which in fact provided an independent basis
for the discovery of the challenged evidence
, /.inevitable discovery exception - Answer-improperly obtained evidence can be used
when it would later have inevitably been discovered without improper actions by the
police
/.Purged Taint Exception - Answer-If the evidence that is to be introduced is so far
removed from the wrong done by the cops then it may be admissible.
(attenuation)
/.US v. Leon (1984) - Answer-Created the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule
The cops did nothing wrong, therefore, the evidence got to stay
/.Motion to Suppress - Answer-A request that the court prohibit the use of certain
evidence at the trial.
1. the search and seizure was illegal
2. the search and seizure with a warrant was illegal because the warrant is insufficient
on its face, there was not probable cause for the issuance of the warrant, or the warrant
was illegally executed
/.Burden of Proof is on - Answer-the state
/.Independent Source Example - Answer-the source of evidence must be independent
of the initial illegal action taken place.
ex: prints from illegal arrest thrown out, but prints from a prior legal arrest can be used
/.inevitable discovery example - Answer-impossible to avoid or prevent ; an unavoidable
event
- requires only that the evidence hypothetically would have been seized through some
legal means
must be actively pursuing means of discovery
ex: *Christian Burial Case*
/.Brewer v. Williams (1977) - Answer-Called the Christian Burial Speech
*inevitable discovery*
/.Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine - Answer-A legal principle that excludes from
introduction at trial any evidence later developed as a result of an illegal search or
seizure.
/.the prosecution must show on inevitable discovery: - Answer-11th circuit standard
1. the lawful means which made the discovery inevitable, were possessed by the police,
and
2. were actively being pursued prior to the occurrence of the illegal conduct
/.attenuate - Answer-to reduce in force or degree; to weaken
With Correct Answers
Weeks v. US - Answer-Case law that established exclusionary rule, evidence gotten
without a warrant isn't admissible in a *federal court*
Lottery tickets were seized from a home without a SW
/.Wolfe v. Colorado (1949) - Answer-FEDS would go to *local* officers and make them
obtain evidence because the exclusionary rule did not apply to local and state officers
also known as *Silver Platter Doctrine* - was ultimately struck down
/.Mapp v. Ohio (1961) - Answer-Extended the Exclusionary Rule to the states,
increasing the protections for defendants.
Illegally obtained evidence could not be used in state, county, and local govt
Searched Mapp's house with a fake SW for gambling stuff but she had porn (obscene
materials) in her house
/.Government Action - Answer-Any action taken by government officials and their
agents (the po-po)
/.Exclusionary Rule _________ - Answer-only applies to government action
/.The Exclusionary Rule prohibits the following: - Answer-1. The introduction of evidence
seized during an unlawful search
2. Testimony concerning knowledge acquired from that unlawful search
3. Derivative evidence that flowed from the unlawful search
/.Exclusionary Rule Exceptions - Answer-good faith
inevitable discovery
purged taint
independent source
/.The Good Faith Exception : - Answer-An exception to the exclusionary rule, holding
that evidence seized on the basis of a mistakenly issued search warrant can be
introduced at trial if the mistake was made in good faith, that is, if all the parties involved
had reason at the time to believe that the warrant was proper.
*not applicable in GA*
/.independent source exception - Answer-the essential aspect is the existence of
evidence which was not illegally seized and which in fact provided an independent basis
for the discovery of the challenged evidence
, /.inevitable discovery exception - Answer-improperly obtained evidence can be used
when it would later have inevitably been discovered without improper actions by the
police
/.Purged Taint Exception - Answer-If the evidence that is to be introduced is so far
removed from the wrong done by the cops then it may be admissible.
(attenuation)
/.US v. Leon (1984) - Answer-Created the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule
The cops did nothing wrong, therefore, the evidence got to stay
/.Motion to Suppress - Answer-A request that the court prohibit the use of certain
evidence at the trial.
1. the search and seizure was illegal
2. the search and seizure with a warrant was illegal because the warrant is insufficient
on its face, there was not probable cause for the issuance of the warrant, or the warrant
was illegally executed
/.Burden of Proof is on - Answer-the state
/.Independent Source Example - Answer-the source of evidence must be independent
of the initial illegal action taken place.
ex: prints from illegal arrest thrown out, but prints from a prior legal arrest can be used
/.inevitable discovery example - Answer-impossible to avoid or prevent ; an unavoidable
event
- requires only that the evidence hypothetically would have been seized through some
legal means
must be actively pursuing means of discovery
ex: *Christian Burial Case*
/.Brewer v. Williams (1977) - Answer-Called the Christian Burial Speech
*inevitable discovery*
/.Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine - Answer-A legal principle that excludes from
introduction at trial any evidence later developed as a result of an illegal search or
seizure.
/.the prosecution must show on inevitable discovery: - Answer-11th circuit standard
1. the lawful means which made the discovery inevitable, were possessed by the police,
and
2. were actively being pursued prior to the occurrence of the illegal conduct
/.attenuate - Answer-to reduce in force or degree; to weaken
