Sgt Sample Exam Questions and Answers Fully Solved Latest Version 2025
Question 1 is an example of a test question designed to measure candidates' knowledge of N.J.S.A. 2C 1.
Mrs. Harrison has not paid her rent in three months; as a result, she was served with an eviction notice.
She became enraged, and in a fit of anger, recklessly kicked and damaged the bedroom and bathroom
doors. The property owner comes to the police department for the purpose of signing complaints.
According to the NJ Code of Criminal Justice, which is the MOST APPROPRIATE advice for the property
owner?
(a) The matter is landlord-tenant and civil in nature and not within the power of the police.
(b) He should sign a criminal complaint for criminal mischief against Mrs. Harrison.
(c) No criminal charge can be signed, because she recklessly damaged the property without the
employment of fire, explosives, or other dangerous means.
(d) He should sign a criminal complaint for theft. - Answers Question #1 - Key is B NJ Title 2C questions
will generally begin with a scenario that describes the elements of a crime or a detailed situation or
interaction between two or more parties. Candidates will have to consider all the details presented in
the scenario and answer the question based on the statutes presented in NJ Title 2C. Questions may
require the candidates to determine if a statute in N.J.S.A 2C was violated, the reason or main cause of
the violation, and in some cases, choose which charge is most appropriate. In this question, candidates
need to consider the details given in the scenario to make the MOST APPROPRIATE choice from the
options given. The candidate must consider the relationship (landlord/tenant) of the two parties
involved, the damage caused by Mrs. Harrison, and the manner in which the damage was done.
Option (a) is incorrect because, regardless of the relationship between the two parties involved, tangible
property owned by the landlord was damaged which makes this a criminal case.
Option (c) is incorrect because the use of "fire, explosives, or other dangerous means" is not required in
order for Mrs. Harrison's actions to be considered criminal.
Option (d) is incorrect because the details in this scenario do not meet the elements required for a
charge of Theft. Given the flaws in the other options,
, option (b) is the MOST APPROPRIATE answer from the choices provided. According to N.J.S.A. 2C:17.3
Criminal Mischief, an individual is guilty of criminal mischief if he/she: (2) Purposely, knowingly, or
recklessly tampers with tangible property of another so as to endanger person or property, including the
damaging or destroying of a rental premises by a tenant in retaliation for institution of eviction
proceedings.
Question 2 is an example of a test question designed to measure candidates' knowledge of New Jersey
Case Law 2. Must a police officer, who makes observations during a routine safety inspection of a
commercial truck (tractor-trailer), which reasonably leads him to believe it houses a hidden
compartment containing contraband, obtain a search warrant before searching that compartment?
(a) Yes, once the officer has the commercial vehicle detained and has probable cause to believe it has a
hidden compartment, a search warrant is required to further search that compartment.
(b) No, a search of an area of a commercial truck that is within the scope of a proper safety inspection,
may be conducted without a warrant, even though this area is concealed within a hidden compartment.
(c) Yes, the officer's purpose in continuing the search is to obtain evidence of a crime, rather than to
complete the safety inspection, and su - Answers Question #2 - Key is B Case law items will generally
present candidates with a scenario that includes many of the same elements of a case previously
decided in NJ or Federal courts. The court case may not be specifically cited and some of the names and
circumstances may be altered. In most circumstances, the question will ask if the law enforcement
officers' actions are appropriate given the circumstances presented in the scenario, or what offenses
were committed based on the details in the scenario. The details of this question are adapted from the
following case: STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. HEWITT Superior Court, Appellate Division 400 N.J.Super. 376
(App. Div. 2008) An overview and justification for the key is as follows: A search of an area of a
commercial truck that is within the scope of a proper safety inspection may be conducted without a
warrant even though this area is concealed within a hidden compartment and the officer's purpose in
continuing the search is to obtain evidence of a crime rather than to complete the safety inspection. Id.
at 380. In early November, Trooper Hancock, a member of the State Police Commercial Carrier Safety
Inspection Unit, stopped a tractor-trailer on the New Jersey Turnpike in Mount Laurel Township to
conduct a safety inspection. Defendant Anthony Hewitt was driving the tractor and co-defendant Dervan
Facey was in the back in a sleeper. When Hancock approached the truck, he noticed that Hewitt's hands
were visibly shaking and that he appeared nervous. Hancock examined Hewitt's driver's license and the
paperwork for the truck and then directed Hewitt to drive to a nearby rest area in order to conduct a
North American Standard Level II safety inspection. A police officer conducting such an inspection may
examine not only the paperwork for the truck but also make a visual inspection of
Question 1 is an example of a test question designed to measure candidates' knowledge of N.J.S.A. 2C 1.
Mrs. Harrison has not paid her rent in three months; as a result, she was served with an eviction notice.
She became enraged, and in a fit of anger, recklessly kicked and damaged the bedroom and bathroom
doors. The property owner comes to the police department for the purpose of signing complaints.
According to the NJ Code of Criminal Justice, which is the MOST APPROPRIATE advice for the property
owner?
(a) The matter is landlord-tenant and civil in nature and not within the power of the police.
(b) He should sign a criminal complaint for criminal mischief against Mrs. Harrison.
(c) No criminal charge can be signed, because she recklessly damaged the property without the
employment of fire, explosives, or other dangerous means.
(d) He should sign a criminal complaint for theft. - Answers Question #1 - Key is B NJ Title 2C questions
will generally begin with a scenario that describes the elements of a crime or a detailed situation or
interaction between two or more parties. Candidates will have to consider all the details presented in
the scenario and answer the question based on the statutes presented in NJ Title 2C. Questions may
require the candidates to determine if a statute in N.J.S.A 2C was violated, the reason or main cause of
the violation, and in some cases, choose which charge is most appropriate. In this question, candidates
need to consider the details given in the scenario to make the MOST APPROPRIATE choice from the
options given. The candidate must consider the relationship (landlord/tenant) of the two parties
involved, the damage caused by Mrs. Harrison, and the manner in which the damage was done.
Option (a) is incorrect because, regardless of the relationship between the two parties involved, tangible
property owned by the landlord was damaged which makes this a criminal case.
Option (c) is incorrect because the use of "fire, explosives, or other dangerous means" is not required in
order for Mrs. Harrison's actions to be considered criminal.
Option (d) is incorrect because the details in this scenario do not meet the elements required for a
charge of Theft. Given the flaws in the other options,
, option (b) is the MOST APPROPRIATE answer from the choices provided. According to N.J.S.A. 2C:17.3
Criminal Mischief, an individual is guilty of criminal mischief if he/she: (2) Purposely, knowingly, or
recklessly tampers with tangible property of another so as to endanger person or property, including the
damaging or destroying of a rental premises by a tenant in retaliation for institution of eviction
proceedings.
Question 2 is an example of a test question designed to measure candidates' knowledge of New Jersey
Case Law 2. Must a police officer, who makes observations during a routine safety inspection of a
commercial truck (tractor-trailer), which reasonably leads him to believe it houses a hidden
compartment containing contraband, obtain a search warrant before searching that compartment?
(a) Yes, once the officer has the commercial vehicle detained and has probable cause to believe it has a
hidden compartment, a search warrant is required to further search that compartment.
(b) No, a search of an area of a commercial truck that is within the scope of a proper safety inspection,
may be conducted without a warrant, even though this area is concealed within a hidden compartment.
(c) Yes, the officer's purpose in continuing the search is to obtain evidence of a crime, rather than to
complete the safety inspection, and su - Answers Question #2 - Key is B Case law items will generally
present candidates with a scenario that includes many of the same elements of a case previously
decided in NJ or Federal courts. The court case may not be specifically cited and some of the names and
circumstances may be altered. In most circumstances, the question will ask if the law enforcement
officers' actions are appropriate given the circumstances presented in the scenario, or what offenses
were committed based on the details in the scenario. The details of this question are adapted from the
following case: STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. HEWITT Superior Court, Appellate Division 400 N.J.Super. 376
(App. Div. 2008) An overview and justification for the key is as follows: A search of an area of a
commercial truck that is within the scope of a proper safety inspection may be conducted without a
warrant even though this area is concealed within a hidden compartment and the officer's purpose in
continuing the search is to obtain evidence of a crime rather than to complete the safety inspection. Id.
at 380. In early November, Trooper Hancock, a member of the State Police Commercial Carrier Safety
Inspection Unit, stopped a tractor-trailer on the New Jersey Turnpike in Mount Laurel Township to
conduct a safety inspection. Defendant Anthony Hewitt was driving the tractor and co-defendant Dervan
Facey was in the back in a sleeper. When Hancock approached the truck, he noticed that Hewitt's hands
were visibly shaking and that he appeared nervous. Hancock examined Hewitt's driver's license and the
paperwork for the truck and then directed Hewitt to drive to a nearby rest area in order to conduct a
North American Standard Level II safety inspection. A police officer conducting such an inspection may
examine not only the paperwork for the truck but also make a visual inspection of
