ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

12th Grade

16 Qs

quiz-placeholder

Similar activities

Naamvallen oefenquiz

Naamvallen oefenquiz

KG - Professional Development

14 Qs

Role of government

Role of government

10th - 12th Grade

13 Qs

Gender, Age, and Health

Gender, Age, and Health

11th - 12th Grade

19 Qs

游泳常識

游泳常識

12th Grade

16 Qs

PR2: RRL, Conceptual Framework and Methodology

PR2: RRL, Conceptual Framework and Methodology

12th Grade

15 Qs

How well do you know bts?

How well do you know bts?

KG - Professional Development

20 Qs

Fundamental Rights Bharat #12

Fundamental Rights Bharat #12

7th - 12th Grade

17 Qs

Adwentowy zawrót głowy

Adwentowy zawrót głowy

11th - 12th Grade

21 Qs

ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

ALPS Case Law (QB Section 5)

Assessment

Quiz

Other

12th Grade

Practice Problem

Medium

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

+2

Standards-aligned

Created by

Daniel Hippe

Used 3+ times

FREE Resource

AI

Enhance your content in a minute

Add similar questions
Adjust reading levels
Convert to real-world scenario
Translate activity
More...

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

Google

Continue with Google

Email

Continue with Email

Classlink

Continue with Classlink

Clever

Continue with Clever

or continue with

Microsoft

Microsoft

Apple

Apple

Others

Others

Already have an account?