MPOETC Constitutional Law & Civil Rights 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under Terry v. Ohio, what level of suspicion is required for a police officer to conduct a brief investigative stop?
- Probable cause
- Reasonable articulable suspicion (Correct answer)
- Preponderance of evidence
- Beyond reasonable doubt
Correct answer: Reasonable articulable suspicion
Terry stops require only reasonable articulable suspicion, a lower standard than probable cause.
Question 2: The 'plain view' doctrine allows officers to seize evidence without a warrant when which conditions are met?
- The officer is on private property and suspects criminal activity
- The officer is lawfully present, the item is immediately apparent as contraband, and discovery is inadvertent (Correct answer)
- The officer has a tip from a confidential informant and can see the item
- The officer has consent and the item is in plain sight
Correct answer: The officer is lawfully present, the item is immediately apparent as contraband, and discovery is inadvertent
Plain view requires lawful presence, immediately apparent incriminating nature, and lawful access to the object.
Question 3: A suspect invokes their right to counsel during a custodial interrogation. What must officers do?
- Continue questioning about unrelated offenses
- Immediately cease all questioning until an attorney is present (Correct answer)
- Allow a 30-minute break then resume questioning
- Contact the prosecutor before stopping the interview
Correct answer: Immediately cease all questioning until an attorney is present
Under Edwards v. Arizona, once a suspect invokes the right to counsel, all interrogation must stop until counsel is present.
Question 4: Which Supreme Court case established that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment is generally inadmissible in court?
- Weeks v. United States
- Mapp v. Ohio (Correct answer)
- Katz v. United States
- United States v. Leon
Correct answer: Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio (1961) applied the exclusionary rule to state courts, building on the federal rule from Weeks v. United States.
Question 5: Under the Fourteenth Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause prohibits officers from making enforcement decisions based primarily on a person's:
- Prior criminal record
- Location in a high-crime area
- Race or national origin (Correct answer)
- Refusal to identify themselves
Correct answer: Race or national origin
Selective enforcement based on race or national origin constitutes racial profiling and violates the Equal Protection Clause.
Question 6: Which amendment protects citizens from being compelled to testify against themselves in a criminal case?
- Fourth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment (Correct answer)
- Sixth Amendment
- Eighth Amendment
Correct answer: Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment's self-incrimination clause protects individuals from being forced to be witnesses against themselves.
Question 7: The 'good faith' exception to the exclusionary rule, established in United States v. Leon, applies when:
- Officers believed they had verbal consent from the suspect
- Officers acted in reasonable reliance on a facially valid search warrant (Correct answer)
- Officers discovered evidence while on routine patrol
- Officers obtained a warrant within 24 hours of the search
Correct answer: Officers acted in reasonable reliance on a facially valid search warrant
The good faith exception allows evidence obtained under a defective warrant if officers reasonably relied on it in good faith.
MPOETC Constitutional Law & Civil Rights 2
Under Terry v.
Ohio, what level of suspicion is required for a police officer to conduct a brief investigative stop?