FLETC LEGAL EXAM QUESTIONS
WITH COMPLETE ANSWERS
Two officers develop reasonable suspicion that Smith is about to rob a convenience
store. The officers approach Smith, place him under arrest, and search him. The
officer conducting the search feels what is immediately apparent to him to be crack
cocaine. The officer then retrieved the substance. At trial, Smith makes a motion to
suppress the crack cocaine found during the search. According to the law, this
motion should be:
a. Denied, based on the "plain touch" doctrine.
b. Denied, because the officers were justified in conducting a search on Smith.
c. Granted, because the officers acted illegally.
d. Granted, because an officer may lawfully retrieve only weapons during a frisk. -
Answer-a. Denied, based on the "plain touch" doctrine.
INCORRECT: The officers arrested Smith when they only had R/S. PC is required to
arrest and therefore the search of Smith was illegal.
b. Denied, because the officers were justified in conducting a search on Smith.
INCORRECT: The officers arrested Smith when they only had R/S. PC is required to
arrest and therefore the search of Smith was illegal.
c. Granted, because the officers acted illegally.
CORRECT: The officers arrested Smith when they only had R/S. PC is required to
arrest and therefore the search of Smith was illegal.
d. Granted, because an officer may lawfully retrieve only weapons during a frisk.
INCORRECT: During a terry frisk, officers may retrieve weapons, hard objects that
could be a weapon, and anything that is immediately apparent to be contraband
under the plain touch doctrine.
An officer receives a report from the dispatcher about an armed robbery in the area,
along with a description of the vehicle and the three men believed to have committed
the crime. Spotting a vehicle matching the description, with three male occupants
inside, the officer stops the vehicle to investigate. She directs the three occupants
from the vehicle, and examines the vehicle for weapons. Under the front passenger
seat, the officer finds a sawed-off shotgun and some ski masks. All three men are
then arrested. At trial, the men file a motion to suppress the evidence found in the
vehicle. According to the law, this motion should be:
a. Granted, because the officer did not frisk the occupants of the vehicle prior to
frisking the actual vehicle.
b. Granted, because the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to frisk the interior
of the vehicle.
,c. Denied, because the officer had obtained valid consent to searc - Answer-a.
Granted, because the officer did not frisk the occupants of the vehicle prior to frisking
the actual vehicle.
INCORRECT: There is no requirement to frisk the occupants before frisking the car.
b. Granted, because the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to frisk the interior
of the vehicle. INCORRECT: The report, the description, and the fact the vehicle and
occupants generally matching the description is RS criminal activity is afoot.
Because the crime under suspicion is one in which a weapon is often used, there is
also RS the occupants are presently armed and dangerous. This permits a Terry
frisk of the occupants and under the seat (as well as the passenger compartment
and unlocked containers therein) for weapons.
c. Denied, because the officer had obtained valid consent to search the interior of the
vehicle.
INCORRECT: There are no facts to suggest the occupants consented to the frisk of
the car.
d. Denied, because the officer was justified in looking under the front passenger seat
for weapons.
CORRECT: The report, the description, and the fact the vehicle and occupants
generally matching the description is RS criminal activity is afoot. Because the crime
under suspicion is one in which a weapon is often used, there is also RS the
occupants are presently armed and dangerous. This permits a Terry frisk of the
occupants and under the seat (as well as the passenger compartment and unlocked
containers therein) for weapons.
10. Jones is a Park Ranger with the National Park Service. He sees Smith driving
inside a national park. Based on reasonable suspicion that Smith has committed a
federal felony (larceny), Jones gives chase and pulls Smith over. Jones directs Smith
out of his car and after repeating the direction several times, Smith complies. Smith
then is belligerent and argumentative, wanders about, keeps turning his side to
Officer Jones and repeatedly reaches into the pocket that Jones can't see even after
being told to keep still and keep his hands out of his pocket. Jones then places Smith
into handcuffs, frisks him, places Smith into the rear of the police car, and frisks the
passenger compartment and trunk for weapons. In the trunk Jones finds drugs in
plain view that are offered against Smith at trial. Will the drugs be admissible at trial?
a. Yes, because Smith's actions permitted a frisk of the trunk.
b. Yes, because Smi - Answer-a. Yes, because Smith's actions permitted a frisk of
the trunk.
INCORRECT: Jones could frisk the passenger compartment for weapons because
he had RS that Smith was presently armed and dangerous. To go into the trunk,
however, Jones needed consent or PC. (The mobile conveyance exception would
excuse having to obtain a warrant.)
b. Yes, because Smith may search a mobile conveyance without either PC or a
warrant.
,INCORRECT: Smith may search a mobile conveyance without a warrant, but PC is
still required.
c. No, because ordering Smith out of the car and handcuffing him was a 4th
Amendment violation making the search also illegal.
INCORRECT: An officer may direct a driver from his car during a Terry stop.
Reasonable force, to include handcuffs, may be used under this circumstances
because of Smith's non-compliance, walking about, and making furtive gestures after
being told not to.
d. No, because Jones could not frisk the trunk under the facts provided.
CORRECT: A frisk of Jones for weapons is permissible because there is RS he is
presently armed and dangerous based upon his belligerence, movements, non-
compliance, and the way he kept reaching into his pockets and turning away. The
vehicle can also be frisked but the trunk cannot. Also, Jones had only RS and there
are no facts that give him PC to go into the trunk.
11. Two federal officers develop reasonable suspicion that Smith is about to rob the
Federal Credit Union. The officers approach Smith, identify themselves as federal
officers, and instruct him to place his hands on the wall. One of the officers conducts
a frisk of Smith, and, upon touching Smith's right front pants pocket, discovers what
is immediately apparent to him to be crack cocaine. The officer retrieves the cocaine
and arrests Smith. At his trial for possession of narcotics, Smith files a motion to
suppress all evidence obtained during the frisk. According to the law, this evidence
will be:
a. Admissible, because the officer discovered the cocaine through the "plain touch"
doctrine.
b. Admissible, because a frisk for evidence, including narcotics, may always be
conducted following a valid Terry stop.
c. Suppressed, because a Terry frisk may only be utilized to discover readily
accessible weapons that a sus - Answer-a. Admissible, because the officer
discovered the cocaine through the "plain touch" doctrine.
CORRECT: Three elements must be present before the "plain touch" doctrine will
permit evidence to be seized during a Terry frisk: First, the frisk itself must be lawful;
second, the incriminating nature of the item must be immediately apparent to the
officer; and third, the discovery is limited to the initial touching, without further
manipulation. All three elements are present in this scenario.
b. Admissible, because a frisk for evidence, including narcotics, may always be
conducted following a valid Terry stop.
INCORRECT: A frisk may not always be permissible following a Terry stop. In order
to lawfully frisk a suspect, an officer must have reasonable suspicion to believe that
the suspect is presently armed and dangerous. If this suspicion exists, the officer
may do a protective pat-down of the suspect looking for any weapons that might be
utilized against the officer during the investigatory stop. An officer may not, however,
conduct a Terry frisk to discover evidence of a crime.
, c. Suppressed, because a Terry frisk may only be utilized to discover readily
accessible weapons that a suspect may use against an officer during an
investigatory stop.
INCORRECT: While a law enforcement officer may not frisk a suspect looking for
evidence of a crime, where immediately incriminating evidence is uncovered during a
lawful Terry frisk, the law does not require that an officer turn a blind eye to it. In
such circumstances, the officer may seize the incriminating evidence, even though
the evidence is not a weapon.
d. Suppressed, because the officer could not lawfully conduct a frisk of Smith.
INCORRECT: The officers had reasonable suspicion that Smith was about to commit
a robbery. Because of the nature of this offense, the officers
12. Brown is suspected of being involved in a conspiracy to traffic narcotics. Agents
learn that Brown has a houseboat docked at a lake 147 miles from his home. While
Brown has not been on the boat for more than two years, he has kept up the
mooring fees and registration of the vessel. The agents reasonably suspect that
evidence of the narcotics conspiracy will be found on the boat. Once the boat is
located, three agents board the boat to conduct a search. While no evidence of
narcotics trafficking is found, the agents do find evidence of an unrelated murder in
the cabin. At his trial for murder, Brown makes a pretrial motion to suppress the
evidence found on the boat. According to the law, this evidence will be:
a. Admissible, because the warrantless search of a mobile conveyance is an
exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.
b. Admissible, because Brown has, through his actions, given up any - Answer-a.
Admissible, because the warrantless search of a mobile conveyance is an exception
to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.
INCORRECT: While the warrantless search of a mobile conveyance (i.e., a Carroll
search) is an exception to the Fourth Amendment, the requirements for that type of
search are not present in this case. A Carroll search requires probable cause, rather
than reasonable suspicion. If probable cause does not exist, a Carroll search is
impermissible.
b. Admissible, because Brown has, through his actions, given up any reasonable
expectation of privacy in the boat.
INCORRECT: While Brown has not been on the boat for more than two years, it is
clear that he has not abandoned the boat, nor his expectation of privacy in it. By
keeping up the mooring and registration fees, Brown is retaining his privacy interest
in the boat.
c. Inadmissible, because the mobile conveyance exception to the warrant
requirement does not apply in this case.
CORRECT: The mobile conveyance exception to the warrant requirement does not
apply in this case because probable cause is not present. The mobile conveyance
exception requires both probable cause and ready mobility before a warrantless
search can be conducted.
WITH COMPLETE ANSWERS
Two officers develop reasonable suspicion that Smith is about to rob a convenience
store. The officers approach Smith, place him under arrest, and search him. The
officer conducting the search feels what is immediately apparent to him to be crack
cocaine. The officer then retrieved the substance. At trial, Smith makes a motion to
suppress the crack cocaine found during the search. According to the law, this
motion should be:
a. Denied, based on the "plain touch" doctrine.
b. Denied, because the officers were justified in conducting a search on Smith.
c. Granted, because the officers acted illegally.
d. Granted, because an officer may lawfully retrieve only weapons during a frisk. -
Answer-a. Denied, based on the "plain touch" doctrine.
INCORRECT: The officers arrested Smith when they only had R/S. PC is required to
arrest and therefore the search of Smith was illegal.
b. Denied, because the officers were justified in conducting a search on Smith.
INCORRECT: The officers arrested Smith when they only had R/S. PC is required to
arrest and therefore the search of Smith was illegal.
c. Granted, because the officers acted illegally.
CORRECT: The officers arrested Smith when they only had R/S. PC is required to
arrest and therefore the search of Smith was illegal.
d. Granted, because an officer may lawfully retrieve only weapons during a frisk.
INCORRECT: During a terry frisk, officers may retrieve weapons, hard objects that
could be a weapon, and anything that is immediately apparent to be contraband
under the plain touch doctrine.
An officer receives a report from the dispatcher about an armed robbery in the area,
along with a description of the vehicle and the three men believed to have committed
the crime. Spotting a vehicle matching the description, with three male occupants
inside, the officer stops the vehicle to investigate. She directs the three occupants
from the vehicle, and examines the vehicle for weapons. Under the front passenger
seat, the officer finds a sawed-off shotgun and some ski masks. All three men are
then arrested. At trial, the men file a motion to suppress the evidence found in the
vehicle. According to the law, this motion should be:
a. Granted, because the officer did not frisk the occupants of the vehicle prior to
frisking the actual vehicle.
b. Granted, because the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to frisk the interior
of the vehicle.
,c. Denied, because the officer had obtained valid consent to searc - Answer-a.
Granted, because the officer did not frisk the occupants of the vehicle prior to frisking
the actual vehicle.
INCORRECT: There is no requirement to frisk the occupants before frisking the car.
b. Granted, because the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to frisk the interior
of the vehicle. INCORRECT: The report, the description, and the fact the vehicle and
occupants generally matching the description is RS criminal activity is afoot.
Because the crime under suspicion is one in which a weapon is often used, there is
also RS the occupants are presently armed and dangerous. This permits a Terry
frisk of the occupants and under the seat (as well as the passenger compartment
and unlocked containers therein) for weapons.
c. Denied, because the officer had obtained valid consent to search the interior of the
vehicle.
INCORRECT: There are no facts to suggest the occupants consented to the frisk of
the car.
d. Denied, because the officer was justified in looking under the front passenger seat
for weapons.
CORRECT: The report, the description, and the fact the vehicle and occupants
generally matching the description is RS criminal activity is afoot. Because the crime
under suspicion is one in which a weapon is often used, there is also RS the
occupants are presently armed and dangerous. This permits a Terry frisk of the
occupants and under the seat (as well as the passenger compartment and unlocked
containers therein) for weapons.
10. Jones is a Park Ranger with the National Park Service. He sees Smith driving
inside a national park. Based on reasonable suspicion that Smith has committed a
federal felony (larceny), Jones gives chase and pulls Smith over. Jones directs Smith
out of his car and after repeating the direction several times, Smith complies. Smith
then is belligerent and argumentative, wanders about, keeps turning his side to
Officer Jones and repeatedly reaches into the pocket that Jones can't see even after
being told to keep still and keep his hands out of his pocket. Jones then places Smith
into handcuffs, frisks him, places Smith into the rear of the police car, and frisks the
passenger compartment and trunk for weapons. In the trunk Jones finds drugs in
plain view that are offered against Smith at trial. Will the drugs be admissible at trial?
a. Yes, because Smith's actions permitted a frisk of the trunk.
b. Yes, because Smi - Answer-a. Yes, because Smith's actions permitted a frisk of
the trunk.
INCORRECT: Jones could frisk the passenger compartment for weapons because
he had RS that Smith was presently armed and dangerous. To go into the trunk,
however, Jones needed consent or PC. (The mobile conveyance exception would
excuse having to obtain a warrant.)
b. Yes, because Smith may search a mobile conveyance without either PC or a
warrant.
,INCORRECT: Smith may search a mobile conveyance without a warrant, but PC is
still required.
c. No, because ordering Smith out of the car and handcuffing him was a 4th
Amendment violation making the search also illegal.
INCORRECT: An officer may direct a driver from his car during a Terry stop.
Reasonable force, to include handcuffs, may be used under this circumstances
because of Smith's non-compliance, walking about, and making furtive gestures after
being told not to.
d. No, because Jones could not frisk the trunk under the facts provided.
CORRECT: A frisk of Jones for weapons is permissible because there is RS he is
presently armed and dangerous based upon his belligerence, movements, non-
compliance, and the way he kept reaching into his pockets and turning away. The
vehicle can also be frisked but the trunk cannot. Also, Jones had only RS and there
are no facts that give him PC to go into the trunk.
11. Two federal officers develop reasonable suspicion that Smith is about to rob the
Federal Credit Union. The officers approach Smith, identify themselves as federal
officers, and instruct him to place his hands on the wall. One of the officers conducts
a frisk of Smith, and, upon touching Smith's right front pants pocket, discovers what
is immediately apparent to him to be crack cocaine. The officer retrieves the cocaine
and arrests Smith. At his trial for possession of narcotics, Smith files a motion to
suppress all evidence obtained during the frisk. According to the law, this evidence
will be:
a. Admissible, because the officer discovered the cocaine through the "plain touch"
doctrine.
b. Admissible, because a frisk for evidence, including narcotics, may always be
conducted following a valid Terry stop.
c. Suppressed, because a Terry frisk may only be utilized to discover readily
accessible weapons that a sus - Answer-a. Admissible, because the officer
discovered the cocaine through the "plain touch" doctrine.
CORRECT: Three elements must be present before the "plain touch" doctrine will
permit evidence to be seized during a Terry frisk: First, the frisk itself must be lawful;
second, the incriminating nature of the item must be immediately apparent to the
officer; and third, the discovery is limited to the initial touching, without further
manipulation. All three elements are present in this scenario.
b. Admissible, because a frisk for evidence, including narcotics, may always be
conducted following a valid Terry stop.
INCORRECT: A frisk may not always be permissible following a Terry stop. In order
to lawfully frisk a suspect, an officer must have reasonable suspicion to believe that
the suspect is presently armed and dangerous. If this suspicion exists, the officer
may do a protective pat-down of the suspect looking for any weapons that might be
utilized against the officer during the investigatory stop. An officer may not, however,
conduct a Terry frisk to discover evidence of a crime.
, c. Suppressed, because a Terry frisk may only be utilized to discover readily
accessible weapons that a suspect may use against an officer during an
investigatory stop.
INCORRECT: While a law enforcement officer may not frisk a suspect looking for
evidence of a crime, where immediately incriminating evidence is uncovered during a
lawful Terry frisk, the law does not require that an officer turn a blind eye to it. In
such circumstances, the officer may seize the incriminating evidence, even though
the evidence is not a weapon.
d. Suppressed, because the officer could not lawfully conduct a frisk of Smith.
INCORRECT: The officers had reasonable suspicion that Smith was about to commit
a robbery. Because of the nature of this offense, the officers
12. Brown is suspected of being involved in a conspiracy to traffic narcotics. Agents
learn that Brown has a houseboat docked at a lake 147 miles from his home. While
Brown has not been on the boat for more than two years, he has kept up the
mooring fees and registration of the vessel. The agents reasonably suspect that
evidence of the narcotics conspiracy will be found on the boat. Once the boat is
located, three agents board the boat to conduct a search. While no evidence of
narcotics trafficking is found, the agents do find evidence of an unrelated murder in
the cabin. At his trial for murder, Brown makes a pretrial motion to suppress the
evidence found on the boat. According to the law, this evidence will be:
a. Admissible, because the warrantless search of a mobile conveyance is an
exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.
b. Admissible, because Brown has, through his actions, given up any - Answer-a.
Admissible, because the warrantless search of a mobile conveyance is an exception
to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.
INCORRECT: While the warrantless search of a mobile conveyance (i.e., a Carroll
search) is an exception to the Fourth Amendment, the requirements for that type of
search are not present in this case. A Carroll search requires probable cause, rather
than reasonable suspicion. If probable cause does not exist, a Carroll search is
impermissible.
b. Admissible, because Brown has, through his actions, given up any reasonable
expectation of privacy in the boat.
INCORRECT: While Brown has not been on the boat for more than two years, it is
clear that he has not abandoned the boat, nor his expectation of privacy in it. By
keeping up the mooring and registration fees, Brown is retaining his privacy interest
in the boat.
c. Inadmissible, because the mobile conveyance exception to the warrant
requirement does not apply in this case.
CORRECT: The mobile conveyance exception to the warrant requirement does not
apply in this case because probable cause is not present. The mobile conveyance
exception requires both probable cause and ready mobility before a warrantless
search can be conducted.
