OR Bar Criminal Procedure 3

Question 1

When analyzing a search and seizure issue under the Oregon Constitution, Oregon courts will:

Accepted Answer

Conduct an independent state constitutional analysis under Article I, Section 9 that may provide broader protections than federal minimums

Answer

Apply identical standards to the federal Fourth Amendment analysis

Answer

Defer to U.S. Supreme Court interpretations of parallel constitutional provisions

Answer

Apply federal standards unless the Oregon legislature has enacted a higher standard by statute

Question 2

Under Brady v. Maryland and its progeny, the prosecution's constitutional disclosure obligation requires turning over:

Accepted Answer

Material evidence favorable to the defendant, including both exculpatory and impeachment evidence

Answer

All evidence in the prosecution's possession before trial begins

Answer

Only exculpatory evidence — Brady does not extend to impeachment material

Answer

Evidence only if the defendant makes a specific request identifying the material sought

Question 3

In Oregon, a defendant charged with a felony offense:

Accepted Answer

May waive the right to grand jury indictment and consent to prosecution by information

Answer

Must be charged by grand jury indictment, a right that cannot be waived

Answer

May demand that any information filed by the prosecutor be reviewed by a grand jury before trial

Answer

Has no right to grand jury indictment because Oregon has abolished the grand jury system

Question 4

Under Georgia v. Randolph, when two co-occupants of a shared dwelling are both physically present and one consents to a police search while the other explicitly refuses, the warrantless search is:

Accepted Answer

Invalid because the physically present, objecting co-occupant's refusal overrides the consenting co-occupant's permission

Answer

Valid because either co-occupant with shared access may consent on behalf of both

Answer

Valid if the consenting co-occupant has greater access rights to the searched area

Answer

Invalid but any evidence found may still be admitted under the good faith exception

Question 5

The 'fruit of the poisonous tree' doctrine requires suppression of derivative evidence stemming from a constitutional violation UNLESS:

Accepted Answer

The evidence falls within the independent source, inevitable discovery, or attenuation exceptions

Answer

The government proves the evidence was not causally connected to the violation

Answer

The constitutional violation was minor and the officer acted in good faith

Answer

The trial court determines the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect

Question 6

Under In re Winship, the Due Process Clause requires that in any criminal prosecution the government prove:

Accepted Answer

Every element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt

Answer

Every element of the charged offense by a preponderance of the evidence

Answer

The defendant's guilt by clear and convincing evidence

Answer

The defendant's guilt to a mathematical or absolute certainty

Question 7

Under the rule established in Apprendi v. New Jersey, which facts must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt?

Accepted Answer

Any fact other than a prior conviction that increases the penalty beyond the prescribed statutory maximum

Answer

Sentencing factors a judge considers when imposing a sentence within the statutory range

Answer

Mitigating circumstances that would reduce a defendant's sentence below the standard guideline range

Answer

All facts relevant to a sentencing determination under a mandatory guidelines system