LLM Criminal Law & Procedure 4 â Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under the inevitable discovery doctrine, unlawfully obtained evidence is admissible if:
- The defendant consented to the search after the illegal seizure
- The evidence would have been discovered through independent lawful means (Correct answer)
- The officer acted in good faith reliance on a warrant
- A subsequent valid warrant was obtained for the same evidence
Correct answer: The evidence would have been discovered through independent lawful means
Nix v. Williams held that the exclusionary rule does not bar evidence that the prosecution can prove would inevitably have been discovered through lawful investigative procedures.
Question 2: The entrapment defense (federal subjective test) focuses primarily on:
- Whether a reasonable person would have been induced to commit the crime
- Whether the defendant had a predisposition to commit the offense before government inducement (Correct answer)
- Whether the government's conduct violated due process
- Whether law enforcement used deceptive tactics
Correct answer: Whether the defendant had a predisposition to commit the offense before government inducement
Under the federal subjective test, entrapment exists only if the government induced the crime and the defendant lacked predisposition to commit it prior to government contact.
Question 3: Which element distinguishes first-degree murder from second-degree murder in most U.S. jurisdictions?
- The use of a deadly weapon
- Premeditation and deliberation (Correct answer)
- The identity of the victim
- Whether the killing occurred in a public place
Correct answer: Premeditation and deliberation
First-degree murder typically requires proof of premeditation and deliberationâa prior formed intent to killâwhereas second-degree murder involves intentional killing without those elements.
Question 4: Which Fourth Amendment doctrine permits officers who lawfully arrest a person to search the area within the arrestee's immediate control without a warrant?
- Automobile exception
- Terry stop-and-frisk doctrine
- Chimel search incident to arrest (Correct answer)
- Exigent circumstances rule
Correct answer: Chimel search incident to arrest
Chimel v. California authorizes a warrantless search of the area within the arrestee's immediate reach to protect officer safety and prevent destruction of evidence.
Question 5: A defendant charged under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) must be shown to have committed at least how many predicate acts within a ten-year period?
- One
- Two (Correct answer)
- Three
- Five
Correct answer: Two
18 U.S.C. § 1961(5) defines a 'pattern of racketeering activity' as at least two predicate acts within ten years, showing continuity of criminal activity.
Question 6: Under the MPC, a person is legally insane if, as a result of mental disease or defect, he lacked substantial capacity to:
- Distinguish right from wrong at the moment of the crime
- Appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct to the law (Correct answer)
- Form any intent whatsoever
- Understand the charges against him at trial
Correct answer: Appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct to the law
MPC § 4.01 excuses a defendant who, due to mental disease or defect, lacks substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to legal requirements.
Question 7: The Confrontation Clause bars admission of testimonial hearsay from an absent declarant unless the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, per:
- Ohio v. Roberts
- Crawford v. Washington (Correct answer)
- Pointer v. Texas
- Davis v. Washington
Correct answer: Crawford v. Washington
Crawford v. Washington overruled Ohio v. Roberts and held that the Confrontation Clause bars admission of testimonial hearsay unless the declarant is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine.
Under the inevitable discovery doctrine, unlawfully obtained evidence is admissible if: