ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

12th Grade

16 Qs

quiz-placeholder

Similar activities

country music

country music

6th Grade - Professional Development

11 Qs

VA Road Signs

VA Road Signs

10th - 12th Grade

12 Qs

Court Systems & Structures-Roles

Court Systems & Structures-Roles

12th Grade

20 Qs

Road Safety Quiz

Road Safety Quiz

9th - 12th Grade

20 Qs

C&J: Chapter 5 Test Review [21-22]

C&J: Chapter 5 Test Review [21-22]

9th - 12th Grade

15 Qs

ASL Classifiers

ASL Classifiers

8th - 12th Grade

11 Qs

Youtube

Youtube

KG - University

11 Qs

Progressive era quizizz

Progressive era quizizz

9th - 12th Grade

11 Qs

ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

Assessment

Quiz

Other

12th Grade

Medium

CCSS
RI.8.1, RI.8.8, RL.11-12.1

+2

Standards-aligned

Created by

Daniel Hippe

Used 2+ times

FREE Resource

16 questions

Show all answers

1.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

In Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971), who is authorized to issue warrants?

The State Attorney General

Only a neutral and detached magistrate

The police chief

The governor

2.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What limitation was established regarding the automobile exception in Coolidge v. New Hampshire?

Cars can be searched without a warrant

Cars parked in driveways should not be searched without a warrant

All vehicles can be searched at any time

Only commercial vehicles require a warrant

Tags

CCSS.RI.8.1

CCSS.RI.8.8

CCSS.RL.11-12.1

CCSS.RL.8.1

CCSS.RL.9-10.1

3.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What must be provided before any custodial interrogation according to Miranda v. Arizona (1966)?

A written statement

Miranda warnings

A public defender

A search warrant

Tags

CCSS.RI.8.1

CCSS.RI.8.8

CCSS.RL.11-12.1

CCSS.RL.8.1

CCSS.RL.9-10.1

4.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What right does the Miranda warning protect against?

Right to a speedy trial

Right against self-incrimination

Right to bear arms

Right to free speech

Tags

CCSS.RI.8.1

CCSS.RI.8.8

CCSS.RL.11-12.1

CCSS.RL.8.1

CCSS.RL.9-10.1

5.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What change did Horton v. California (1990) make regarding plain view observations?

Inadvertence is required

Inadvertence is no longer required

Only police chiefs can make observations

Observations must be recorded

6.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What does Mapp v. Ohio (1961) state about illegally seized evidence?

It can be used in state trials

It must be suppressed or excluded

It is admissible in federal cases

It can be used if the suspect consents

Tags

CCSS.RI.8.1

CCSS.RI.8.8

CCSS.RL.11-12.1

CCSS.RL.8.1

CCSS.RL.9-10.1

7.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

Which case originally gave birth to the exclusionary rule?

Terry v. Ohio

Weeks v. United States

Miranda v. Arizona

Coolidge v. New Hampshire

Create a free account and access millions of resources

Create resources
Host any resource
Get auto-graded reports
or continue with
Microsoft
Apple
Others
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy
Already have an account?