TCOLE Arrest, Search, and Seizure 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Texas CCP Art. 38.23 differs from the federal exclusionary rule because it:
- Only applies to felony prosecutions
- Excludes evidence obtained in violation of any law, including state statutes — not just constitutional violations (Correct answer)
- Allows admission of evidence if the violation was by a private citizen
- Is less protective of individual rights than the federal rule
Correct answer: Excludes evidence obtained in violation of any law, including state statutes — not just constitutional violations
Art. 38.23 is broader than the federal rule, excluding evidence obtained in violation of any provision of state or federal law, not just constitutional violations.
Question 2: The 'standing' requirement for a Fourth Amendment suppression motion means the defendant must show:
- They were present at the scene of the search
- They have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the place or item searched (Correct answer)
- They were named in the search warrant
- The officer who conducted the search was acting outside their jurisdiction
Correct answer: They have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the place or item searched
A defendant must demonstrate a personal, reasonable expectation of privacy in the area searched to have standing to challenge the search under the Fourth Amendment.
Question 3: When a suspect voluntarily abandons property before being stopped by police, the Fourth Amendment generally:
- Still protects the property from warrantless seizure
- Does not protect the abandoned property because the suspect has relinquished any expectation of privacy (Correct answer)
- Requires officers to obtain a warrant before examining the abandoned property
- Protects the property for 24 hours after abandonment
Correct answer: Does not protect the abandoned property because the suspect has relinquished any expectation of privacy
Abandoned property is not protected by the Fourth Amendment because a person who voluntarily discards property has relinquished any reasonable expectation of privacy in it.
Question 4: A 'no-knock' search warrant in Texas may be authorized when the affidavit establishes:
- The suspect is known to the officers
- Knocking and announcing would be dangerous or futile, or would inhibit the investigation (Correct answer)
- The offense involves a felony drug charge regardless of circumstances
- The magistrate personally finds the suspect dangerous
Correct answer: Knocking and announcing would be dangerous or futile, or would inhibit the investigation
Texas CCP Art. 18.06 and Richards v. Wisconsin allow no-knock entry when officers demonstrate that announcement would be dangerous, futile, or allow destruction of evidence.
Question 5: The concept of 'reasonable expectation of privacy' was articulated in which landmark Supreme Court case?
- Katz v. United States (Correct answer)
- Mapp v. Ohio
- Terry v. Ohio
- Carroll v. United States
Correct answer: Katz v. United States
Katz v. United States (1967) established the 'reasonable expectation of privacy' test, shifting Fourth Amendment analysis from physical trespass to privacy expectations.
Question 6: Under Texas law, a warrantless arrest made in a private residence is generally:
- Permitted whenever the officer has probable cause
- Prohibited unless exigent circumstances or consent exist (Correct answer)
- Permitted during daytime hours only
- Permitted if the offense is a felony and the officer is in uniform
Correct answer: Prohibited unless exigent circumstances or consent exist
Payton v. New York held that the Fourth Amendment prohibits warrantless, nonconsensual entry into a home to make a routine felony arrest absent exigent circumstances.
Question 7: A consent search may be invalidated if the court finds that the consent was:
- Given verbally rather than in writing
- Given by a third party who had apparent authority
- The product of coercion, duress, or a Fourth Amendment violation that tainted the consent (Correct answer)
- Given by someone over the age of 18 without a guardian present
Correct answer: The product of coercion, duress, or a Fourth Amendment violation that tainted the consent
Consent is involuntary — and therefore invalid — when it results from coercion, duress, or is tainted by a prior unlawful detention under the Fourth Amendment.
TCOLE Arrest, Search, and Seizure 5
Texas CCP Art. 38.23 differs from the federal exclusionary rule because it: