MN POST Test Questions and Verified Solutions 2024

MN POST Test Questions and Verified Solutions 2024 Weeks v. US (1914) - Answer -Exclusionary rule - warrantless seizure of items from private residence violates 4th Amendment Terry v. Ohio (1968) - Answer -"Stop and Frisk" police may: - stop a person if they have reasonable suspicion that the person committed, or is about to commit, a crime - frisk the suspect for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous Reasonable Suspicion - Answer -a suspicion based on specific facts, training, and experience; less than probable cause Probable cause to arrest - Answer -facts and circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe that a crime has been committed and a particular person has committed it Probable cause to search - Answer -facts and circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe that a evidence/property is located in a particular place to be searched frisk - Answer -an over-the-clothes pat-down or minimal search by police to discover weapons Chimel v. California (1969) - "Chimel Rule" - Answer -arresting officers are limited to searches within the immediate vicinity/control of the suspect being arrested; any other search requires warrant Mapp v. Ohio (1961) - Answer -Extended the Exclusionary Rule to the states Carroll v. U.S. (1925) - "Carroll Doctrine" - Answer -Automobile exception - warrantless search of a car does not violate 4th Amendment, if there is PC to believe evidence a crime is present in vehicle, and exigent circumstances exist to believe vehicle could be moved before warrant is obtained Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) - Answer -Right to counsel - extended right to counsel during criminal trial to the states Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) - Answer -Right to counsel- criminal suspects have a right to counsel during police interrogations Miranda v. Arizona (1966) - "Miranda Warning" - Answer -law enforcement required to give formal warning advising criminal suspects in custody of their rights, before interrogation In re Gault (1967) - Answer -Due process - 14th Amendment Due Process Clause applies to juveniles In re Winship (1970) - Answer -Due process - established burden of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" as standard in all federal and state cases - removed "preponderance of evidence" standard previously used in juvenil