1. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law, and any state constitutional provision or any law in conflict with it

is invalid. 

A) True

 B) False

  2. The due process guarantee binds the federal government but not the state governments because the guarantee is contained in the U.S. Constitution, which sets rules for the federal government only. 

A) True

 B) False

  3. In order to meet the burden of proof to find a person guilty of a crime, the defendant’s guilt must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence. 

A) True 

B) False

  4. The party that appeals a suit is the appellee; the party against whom the appeal is taken is the appellant. 

A) True 

B) False

  5. An appellee is 

A) the party who lost at the trial-court level.

 B) the plaintiff at the trial-court level. 

C) the party who brings the appeal. 

D) Two of the above 

E) None of the above

6. In Washington v. Glucksberg the Supreme Court addressed whether or not a state’s assisted suicide ban was constitutional. In deciding the case the court noted that in the more than two hundred years of the country’s existence courts never recognized the existence of a constitutional right to kill oneself, and that fundamental rights must be deeply rooted in the nation’s history and tradition. Which of the following jurisprudential schools of thought is reflected in the Court’s assertion?

 A) Natural Law

 B) Historical Jurisprudence 

C) Utilitarian Law 

D) Analytical Positivism 

E) A and B

 7. In Katko v. Briney the defendant set a spring gun trap that seriously injured a trespasser. The appropriate state law provides that punitive damages will only be permitted when malice is shown or when a defendant acts with wanton and reckless disregard of the rights of others. The defendant in the case testified at trial that he did not intend to injure anyone. There was evidence that he used a loaded shell, that tin was nailed over the window so that the spring gun could not be seen from the outside, and that no warning of its presence was posted. Which of the following statements is false?

 A) Whether or not the defendant acted with wanton and reckless disregard for the rights of others is a question of fact to be decided at trial. 

B) What standard of evidence or proof is required in order to recover punitive damages is a question of law.

 C) Appeals courts review for errors of law more closely than findings of fact. 

D) The appeals court will have to hear testimony in order to determine whether the defendant acted with wanton and reckless disregard for the rights of others. 

E) Appeals courts don’t review for findings of fact as closely as they do for errors of law.

 8. Assume the same facts as in Problem 7. Which of the following statements regarding Katko v. Briney is true? 

A) Katko v. Briney is an example of a criminal appeal. 

B) The landowner in Katko v. Briney, at the end of the trial at which he was found responsible, will have to go to jail. 

C) Because there was a dissenting opinion in the appeal of Katko v. Briney, there will have to be a new trial. 

D) Katko v. Briney is an example of a civil case. While the trespasser faced a separate criminal proceeding, the landowner did not; he only had to pay damages after the verdict was upheld on appeal. E) Both c and d are both true.

. Assume that there is no common law duty to rescue a person in peril to whom you are not related. A philosopher who believed that it was morally wrong not to come to the aid of a person in peril, no matter what the law requires, would follow what jurisprudential school of thought? 

A) The law as power B) Natural law C) Positive law D) Utilitarian E) Legal realism 

 10. Steve was driving from his college classes one fine winter day when he saw a snowball coming toward his car. The snowball turned out to be a rock covered with snow, and the impact caused a dent in Steve’s orange Volkswagen. Steve stopped his car, and after examining the damage, walked toward Greg, the person he thought threw the snowball. Steve asked to see Greg’s gloves. Since Greg’s gloves were wet, Steve assumed that Greg was the guilty party and punched him in the mouth. Jay, who was standing about ten feet away behind a tree, was the person who actually threw the snowball. Which of the following cases occurring out of the incident would be criminal in nature? 

A) Steve v. Jay

 B) Greg v. Steve 

C) Greg v. Jay 

D) None of the above

 E) All of the above 

 

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"