constitutional law final exam

what is the incorporation doctrine ?

The incorporation doctrine is a constitutional doctrine that applies the Bill of Rights to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, ensuring that state laws cannot infringe upon individual rights guaranteed by the federal Constitution.

exclusionary rule

A legal principle that prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in a criminal trial, ensuring that law enforcement follows constitutional standards.

what case created the exclusionary rule?

The exclusionary rule was established in the case of Mapp v. Ohio (1961), which held that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state courts.

what is SILA?

The Search Incident to Lawful Arrest (SILA) doctrine allows law enforcement to conduct a warrantless search of an arrested person and their immediate surroundings to ensure officer safety and preserve evidence.

what is the relationship between the 14th amendment and the 4th amendment?

The 14th Amendment incorporates the protections of the 4th Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures to the states, ensuring that state laws also respect individual rights.

is a warrant required for open fields?

No, a warrant is not required for open fields as established in the case of Hester v. United States.

what is curtilage ?

Curtilage refers to the area immediately surrounding a dwelling, which is considered part of the home for Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. It typically includes the yard, driveway, and other enclosed spaces closely associated with the home.

what is the fourth amendment ?

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, requiring law enforcement to obtain a warrant based on probable cause.

what case created the 14th amendment?

The case of Barron v. Baltimore in 1833 established that the Bill of Rights did not apply to state governments, leading to later interpretations that resulted in the incorporation of the 14th Amendment.

what is weeks vs. US ?

The exclusionary rule was extended to the states through the case of Mapp v. Ohio in 1961, which held that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state courts.

what are the exceptions to a warrant requirement?

Exceptions include exigent circumstances, consent, search incident to arrest, and plain view doctrine.

what is exigent circumstances?

what is search incident to arrest?

A legal doctrine allowing police to conduct a warrantless search of a person and their immediate surroundings following an arrest, to ensure officer safety and preserve evidence. (the lunge-able area)

what is plain view?

The plain view doctrine allows law enforcement to seize evidence of a crime without a warrant if it is clearly visible and they are lawfully present at the location.

what are the automobile exceptions ?

Legal principles allowing warrantless searches of vehicles under certain conditions, such as probable cause or the vehicle's mobility.

who is William howard taft?

The 27th President of the United States and later the 10th Chief Justice of the United States, known for his efforts to promote antitrust legislation and his role in the establishment of income tax.

what is the fifth amendment?

what is double jeopardy?

what is custodial investigation?

what 2 elements needed to read miranda ?

1. interrogation

2. and custody.

what is a frisk?

A brief, limited pat-down of a person's outer clothing for weapons, conducted by law enforcement when they have reasonable suspicion of a threat.

what was the significance between weeks vs US AND maps vs Ohio?

These cases established the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in court. Weeks v. US applied this rule to federal cases, while Mapp v. Ohio extended it to state courts.

what is spontaneous utterance ?

A statement made by a person without premeditation or prompting, often considered admissible as evidence due to its spontaneous nature.

what is a Huntley hearing?

“he described it” (statements)

what is a wade hearing?

obtained evidence without a warrant. evidence should be excluded. (evidence)

in New York there are pre trial motions, ‘discovery’. what is that?

pre-trial motions in New York include requests for evidence exchange between parties to ensure a fair trial. allowing nothing sides to prepare their cases adequately.

what is Gideon vs wainwright?

a landmark 1963 Supreme Court case that established the right to legal counsel for criminal defendants in state and federal courts. The case involved Clarence Earl Gideon, who was charged with a felony in Florida but appeared in court without an attorney. The court ruled unanimously in Gideon's favor, and he was later given a new trial with an appointed lawyer and acquitted

two significant outcomes from Gideon vs wainwright

1. if you are poor, you can get a lawyer

2. it is a incorporation case

what is Wong sun VS. US

a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case decided in 1963 that addressed the admissibility of evidence obtained through illegal arrests and searches, establishing critical principles regarding the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine under the Fourth Amendment.

what is Barron vs. Baltimore

a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Bill of Rights applies only to the federal government and not to state or local governments. This decision significantly shaped constitutional law in the United States, particularly concerning the application of individual rights.

amos vs US

a significant U.S. Supreme Court case that dealt with Fourth Amendment protections against unlawful searches and seizures and clarified when evidence obtained without a warrant is admissible in court.

chimel vs california

a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that established limits on searches incident to an arrest under the Fourth Amendment. The ruling clarified how far law enforcement can search a suspect's surroundings when making an arrest.

Florida vs Riley

a significant U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether police surveillance of private property from the air, without a warrant, violated the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. The case specifically dealt with the use of a helicopter to observe activities on private property.

Rodriquez vs US

a significant U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether police can extend a traffic stop to conduct a dog sniff for drugs without reasonable suspicion after the stop’s original purpose has been completed.

Terry vs ohio

a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that established the legality of stop-and-frisk procedures under the Fourth Amendment, provided the police officer has reasonable suspicion that a person is armed and involved in criminal activity.

Escobedo vs Illinois

a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to suspects during police interrogations, reinforcing protections against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment.

6th amendement

Right to a Speedy Trial:

• The accused must be tried promptly to avoid prolonged detention and delays.

7th amendment

Right to a Jury Trial in Civil Cases:

• In civil lawsuits where the value in controversy exceeds $20, individuals have the right to a trial by jury.

8th amendment

protects individuals from excessive punishments and unfair treatment in the justice system.