I85PREP
⌘ K
DC POST study materials
DC POST study resources

DC POST practice questions

One question at a time. Build your DC POST understanding.

First 50 of 200 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1DC Criminal Law and Procedure

Under District of Columbia law, a person may be arrested without a warrant for a misdemeanor offense when the arrest is based on probable cause and the offense is committed in the officer's presence, or when the arrest is authorized by statute for a specific category of offense. Which statement best describes the general warrantless misdemeanor arrest authority of a DC police officer?

  1. The officer may arrest for a misdemeanor only during the commission of a felony in the same transaction.
  2. The officer may arrest for a misdemeanor only if the offense is a crime of violence and the victim signs a complaint.
  3. The officer may arrest for any misdemeanor committed in the officer's presence and for certain statutorily enumerated misdemeanors even if not committed in the officer's presence. Correct answer.
  4. The officer may arrest for a misdemeanor only if a warrant has first been obtained from a Superior Court judge.

Explanation

DC law generally permits warrantless misdemeanor arrests when the offense occurs in the officer's presence, and separately authorizes arrests for enumerated categories such as intrafamily offenses and certain traffic or quality-of-life offenses regardless of presence. A warrant is not required in those circumstances, and violence or victim signature is not a universal precondition.

Question 2DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC police officer stops a person on a public sidewalk and begins a frisk. Which circumstance is required before the officer may conduct a pat-down of the person's outer clothing for weapons?

  1. A full probable cause belief that the person has committed a felony.
  2. An anonymous tip that does not identify any basis of knowledge.
  3. The person's refusal to answer the officer's questions.
  4. A reasonable suspicion, supported by specific and articulable facts, that the person is armed and dangerous. Correct answer.

Explanation

A protective frisk requires reasonable suspicion grounded in specific and articulable facts that the person is armed and presently dangerous. Probable cause to arrest is not required for a frisk, and silence or an unsubstantiated anonymous tip does not by itself supply the needed suspicion.

Question 3DC Criminal Law and Procedure

During a custodial interrogation at a DC police station, a detective reads the suspect the standard warnings and the suspect says, "I want to talk to a lawyer." Under established Fifth Amendment doctrine as applied in the District, what must the officer do?

  1. Stop the interrogation until counsel is present or the suspect initiates further communication, and the invocation must be honored. Correct answer.
  2. Continue questioning for a brief period to clarify whether the suspect really wants counsel.
  3. Continue questioning because the request was not in writing.
  4. Continue questioning because the suspect has not yet made an incriminating statement.

Explanation

Once a suspect unambiguously invokes the right to counsel during custodial interrogation, questioning must cease until counsel is provided or the suspect initiates further discussion. The invocation need not be written, and officers may not keep questioning to clarify or to obtain a statement.

Question 4DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant is charged in DC Superior Court with unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. To establish the prior-conviction element, the prosecution offers a certified copy of the judgment from the earlier case. What is the most accurate characterization of this evidence?

  1. It is admissible as a self-authenticating certified public record to prove the fact of the prior conviction. Correct answer.
  2. It is admissible only if the defendant stipulates to the conviction.
  3. It is inadmissible because it is hearsay with no exception.
  4. It is admissible only if the convicting judge testifies in person.

Explanation

Certified copies of judgments are public records that may be admitted to prove a prior conviction; they fall within recognized hearsay exceptions and require no live testimony from the convicting judge. A defendant's stipulation is not a prerequisite to admissibility.

Question 5DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer observes a driver run a red light and conducts a traffic stop. During the stop, the officer notices a locked briefcase on the back seat and asks the driver to open it. The driver refuses. Which principle governs the officer's authority to search the briefcase?

  1. The officer may search the briefcase because it is in a vehicle, which is categorically exempt from the warrant requirement.
  2. The officer may search the briefcase because the driver was lawfully stopped.
  3. The officer may search the briefcase because a traffic stop automatically authorizes a full vehicle search.
  4. The officer may not search the locked briefcase without a warrant or a recognized exception such as consent, inventory, or exigency. Correct answer.

Explanation

A lawful traffic stop does not by itself authorize a search of closed containers; the officer needs a warrant or a recognized exception such as consent, a valid inventory policy, or exigent circumstances. The automobile exception applies where there is probable cause to search the vehicle or container, which is not present here.

Question 6DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A witness who is unavailable to testify at a DC trial previously gave testimony under oath at a preliminary hearing where the defendant was represented by counsel and had an opportunity to cross-examine. The prosecution seeks to introduce that prior testimony. What is the strongest basis for admission?

  1. The prior testimony is inadmissible because the declarant is unavailable and hearsay is always barred.
  2. The prior sworn testimony is admissible as former testimony because the defendant had a prior opportunity and similar motive to cross-examine. Correct answer.
  3. The prior testimony is admissible only if the witness's out-of-court statement was recorded on video.
  4. The prior testimony is admissible only if the defendant now consents to its use.

Explanation

Former testimony of an unavailable declarant is admissible when the party against whom it is offered had an opportunity and similar motive to develop it by cross-examination at the prior proceeding. Video recording is not required, and the Confrontation Clause is generally satisfied by the prior cross-examination opportunity.

Question 7DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC grand jury returns an indictment. Which statement correctly describes the role of the grand jury in the District of Columbia criminal process?

  1. It determines the guilt or innocence of the accused at trial.
  2. It reviews evidence presented by the prosecutor and determines whether probable cause exists to charge a felony by indictment. Correct answer.
  3. It conducts the arraignment and sets bail conditions.
  4. It imposes sentence after a guilty verdict.

Explanation

The grand jury screens felony charges by determining whether probable cause supports an indictment; it does not adjudicate guilt, impose sentence, or handle arraignment and bail. Those functions belong to the petit jury and the court respectively.

Question 8DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant is charged with assault in DC Superior Court and seeks to introduce evidence that the alleged victim has a prior conviction for fraud. The defense argues this shows the victim is dishonest. How should the court evaluate the impeachment evidence?

  1. The court may admit the prior conviction if the crime involved dishonesty or false statement, subject to the rules governing impeachment by conviction. Correct answer.
  2. The prior conviction is admissible only if the victim opens the door by testifying first.
  3. The prior conviction is never admissible to impeach a witness.
  4. The prior conviction is automatically admissible for any crime.

Explanation

Impeachment by prior conviction is permitted for crimes involving dishonesty or false statement, and other felonies are subject to balancing under the applicable evidence rules. Not every conviction is automatically admissible, and the witness need not testify first for the issue to arise.

Question 9DC Criminal Law and Procedure

DC police execute a search warrant at an apartment and seize a handgun that was not listed in the warrant but was in plain view on a table next to narcotics described in the warrant. Which doctrine most directly supports seizing the handgun?

  1. The plain view doctrine, because the officer was lawfully present and the incriminating character of the item was immediately apparent. Correct answer.
  2. The inventory doctrine, because the gun was catalogued after seizure.
  3. The consent doctrine, because the tenant opened the door.
  4. The inevitable discovery doctrine, because the gun would have been found eventually.

Explanation

Plain view permits warrantless seizure of evidence when the officer is lawfully present, the item is in plain view, and its incriminating character is immediately apparent. Inevitable discovery and inventory are separate doctrines that do not describe the basis for this seizure.

Question 10DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A person is arrested in DC and taken to the station. Under the Fourth Amendment as applied in the District, how promptly must the arrestee be presented before a judicial officer for a probable cause determination?

  1. At the discretion of the arresting officer, with no fixed outer limit.
  2. Promptly, generally within 48 hours, with any delay beyond that requiring a showing of reasonable necessity. Correct answer.
  3. Within one week, because DC uses a paper-based review system.
  4. Within 72 hours, with no exception recognized.

Explanation

Gerstein and County of Riverside establish a presumption that probable cause determinations must occur within 48 hours, and longer delays require justification by the government. The other options state timeframes or discretion inconsistent with that framework.

Question 11DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer receives a tip from a known, reliable informant that a specific apartment is being used to sell narcotics. The informant has provided accurate information in several prior cases and describes the apartment layout and observed transactions. The officer seeks a search warrant. What must the affidavit establish?

  1. Probable cause based on the totality of the circumstances, including the informant's basis of knowledge and veracity. Correct answer.
  2. A mere hunch that criminal activity is occurring.
  3. Only that the informant has never been arrested.
  4. That the informant will testify at trial.

Explanation

Under the totality-of-the-circumstances test, a warrant affidavit must show probable cause, considering the informant's basis of knowledge and veracity as well as corroboration. A hunch is insufficient, and neither the informant's clean record nor a promise to testify is required.

Question 12DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant charged with robbery in DC wants to represent himself at trial. The judge questions him about his education, understanding of the charges, and the risks of self-representation. Which standard governs whether the court must permit the request?

  1. The request must be granted only if standby counsel agrees to take over at sentencing.
  2. The request must be denied unless the defendant has completed law school.
  3. The request must be denied because self-representation is never permitted in felony cases.
  4. The request must be granted if it is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, even if the defendant's skills are poor. Correct answer.

Explanation

Faretta v. California recognizes a constitutional right to self-representation when the request is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, regardless of the defendant's legal skill. The court may appoint standby counsel but cannot require legal training or deny the right categorically in felonies.

Question 13DC Criminal Law and Procedure

At a DC trial, the prosecution offers testimony that the defendant remained silent when first confronted by police before any Miranda warnings were given. The defense objects. How should the court rule?

  1. The silence is always admissible as an admission by the defendant.
  2. The silence is admissible only if the defendant signed a written waiver.
  3. The pre-arrest, pre-Miranda silence is generally not admissible as substantive evidence of guilt, though it may be used for impeachment in limited circumstances. Correct answer.
  4. The silence is admissible because silence is never protected.

Explanation

The use of a defendant's silence as substantive evidence of guilt is generally prohibited, particularly where the silence occurred before warnings or arrest. Limited impeachment use may be permitted, but the prosecution cannot treat silence as a confession.

Question 14DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer conducts a warrantless search of a car's trunk after arresting the driver for a traffic offense and securing the driver in the patrol car. The officer has no probable cause to believe contraband is in the trunk. Which statement best reflects current doctrine?

  1. The search is valid because traffic offenses are strict liability crimes.
  2. The search is valid because any arrest of a driver authorizes a full search of the vehicle, including the trunk.
  3. The search is invalid because the automobile exception requires probable cause and the arrestee's removal does not create an automatic trunk-search authority. Correct answer.
  4. The search is valid because the driver is no longer able to access the trunk.

Explanation

Under Arizona v. Gant and related doctrine, a vehicle search incident to arrest is limited to areas within the arrestee's immediate reach or where evidence of the offense of arrest is likely to be found. A secured arrestee and a traffic offense do not justify a trunk search without probable cause.

Question 15DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant in a DC felony case moves to suppress a confession, arguing that police deliberately used a two-step interrogation: first obtaining an unwarned statement, then giving warnings and obtaining a second statement. Which approach should the court take?

  1. The court should apply the totality of the circumstances and, where the midstream warnings were deliberately withheld, may suppress the post-warning statement unless curative measures were taken. Correct answer.
  2. The court should defer entirely to the officer's subjective intent to comply with Miranda.
  3. The court must automatically suppress both statements without any further inquiry.
  4. The court must automatically admit the post-warning statement because warnings were eventually given.

Explanation

Missouri v. Seibert addresses deliberate two-step interrogation, and courts examine the totality of the circumstances, including whether curative measures accompanied the midstream warnings. Neither automatic admission nor automatic suppression of both statements is correct, and officer intent alone does not resolve the issue.

Question 16DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer stops a pedestrian based on a report of a man matching the pedestrian's description carrying a weapon. During the stop, the officer asks the pedestrian to identify himself. Under DC law and Fourth Amendment principles, what is the pedestrian's obligation?

  1. The pedestrian may be required to provide identification in limited circumstances under DC's stop-and-identify statute, but silence alone cannot be treated as the offense of failure to identify without the statutory predicate. Correct answer.
  2. The pedestrian may never be asked for identification during a stop.
  3. The pedestrian must provide identification only if placed under formal arrest.
  4. The pedestrian must always provide identification on demand in any encounter, including casual conversation.

Explanation

DC's stop-and-identify statute permits an officer to request identification when there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, but the statute has specific predicates and silence alone is not automatically an offense. The other options overstate or understate the obligation.

Question 17DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant is charged with first-degree murder in DC. The prosecution seeks to introduce evidence of the defendant's prior bad acts to show motive and intent. What standard governs admissibility?

  1. The evidence is admissible only if the defendant is convicted of the prior acts in the same trial.
  2. The evidence may be admitted if relevant to a permissible purpose such as motive or intent and its probative value is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. Correct answer.
  3. The evidence is automatically admissible without any balancing test.
  4. The evidence is automatically inadmissible because prior bad acts are always excluded.

Explanation

Prior bad acts may be admitted for permissible purposes such as motive, intent, identity, or common scheme, subject to balancing against unfair prejudice. They are neither categorically excluded nor automatically admitted.

Question 18DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC police officer obtains a warrant to search a residence for stolen electronics. While executing the warrant, officers detain the homeowner in handcuffs for the duration of the search. Which principle most directly governs the detention?

  1. Occupants may be detained only if they are named in the warrant.
  2. Officers may detain occupants during a search when reasonably necessary to secure the premises and prevent interference, but the detention must be reasonable in scope and duration. Correct answer.
  3. Occupants may never be detained during a warrant search.
  4. Occupants may be detained indefinitely until the search is complete, regardless of duration.

Explanation

Michigan v. Summers permits detention of occupants during a warrant search as a reasonable security measure, but the detention must remain reasonable in scope and duration. Blanket prohibitions or unlimited detention authority misstate the rule.

Question 19DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC defendant is convicted after a trial in which the prosecution failed to disclose exculpatory evidence that was material to guilt. Which constitutional standard governs whether the conviction must be reversed?

  1. The conviction must be reversed if there is a reasonable probability that disclosure would have produced a different result. Correct answer.
  2. The conviction must be reversed only if the defendant requested the evidence in writing.
  3. The conviction must be reversed only if the defendant proves the prosecution acted in bad faith.
  4. The conviction must be reversed only if the evidence was in the prosecutor's physical possession.

Explanation

Brady v. Maryland requires disclosure of material exculpatory evidence, and materiality is measured by whether there is a reasonable probability of a different result. Bad faith, physical possession, and a written request are not prerequisites to a Brady violation.

Question 20DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer arrests a suspect for unlawful entry. At the station, the officer searches the suspect's backpack incident to arrest and finds a small amount of marijuana. Which statement best describes the search authority?

  1. A search incident to arrest permits a search of any vehicle the suspect has ever driven.
  2. A search incident to arrest permits a search of the suspect's backpack only with a warrant.
  3. A search incident to arrest may extend to the arrestee's person and the area within the arrestee's immediate control, including containers that could hold a weapon or evidence. Correct answer.
  4. A search incident to arrest permits a search of the suspect's home without a warrant.

Explanation

Chimel v. California limits a search incident to arrest to the arrestee's person and the area within immediate control, including containers that may hold weapons or evidence. The doctrine does not extend to the home or unrelated vehicles.

Question 21DC Criminal Law and Procedure

At a DC suppression hearing, the defendant argues that a traffic stop was pretextual because the officer's real motive was to investigate drug activity. Which standard applies to the officer's subjective motive?

  1. The stop is valid if the officer had reasonable suspicion or probable cause to believe a traffic violation occurred, regardless of subjective motive. Correct answer.
  2. The stop is valid only if the officer admits the traffic violation was the sole reason for the stop.
  3. The stop is invalid unless a supervisor approved the stop in advance.
  4. The stop is invalid whenever the officer had an unstated investigative motive.

Explanation

Whren v. United States holds that an objectively valid traffic stop is reasonable regardless of the officer's subjective motive. Pretext alone does not invalidate a stop supported by an observed violation, and no admission or prior approval is required.

Question 22DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant in DC is charged with distribution of a controlled substance. The prosecution offers a chemist's report identifying the substance. The chemist is unavailable to testify. Which statement best describes the confrontation issue?

  1. Lab reports are never subject to the Confrontation Clause.
  2. Lab reports are admissible without the analyst if the prosecutor represents that they are accurate.
  3. Lab reports are admissible without the analyst only if the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor.
  4. Admission of a testimonial lab report without the analyst's testimony may violate the Confrontation Clause unless the analyst is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine. Correct answer.

Explanation

Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts and Bullcoming v. New Mexico treat testimonial lab reports as subject to the Confrontation Clause, so the analyst generally must testify unless the witness is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine. The other options misstate the doctrine.

Question 23DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer wants to conduct a canine sniff of a vehicle stopped for a traffic violation. The stop has been completed, the citation has been issued, and the officer has no reasonable suspicion of drug activity. Which statement is correct?

  1. The officer may extend the stop indefinitely to conduct the sniff.
  2. The officer may conduct the sniff only if the driver consents in writing.
  3. Extending the stop beyond its original purpose to conduct the sniff without reasonable suspicion may violate the Fourth Amendment. Correct answer.
  4. The officer may conduct the sniff because dogs are not considered a search under any circumstances.

Explanation

Rodriguez v. United States holds that a traffic stop may not be extended beyond the time reasonably required to complete its mission absent reasonable suspicion of other criminal activity. A dog sniff itself may not be a search, but prolonging the stop to conduct one requires justification.

Question 24DC Criminal Law and Procedure

Under DC law, which of the following best describes the offense of unlawful entry?

  1. Remaining in one's own home after a family dispute.
  2. Entering a residence with the intent to commit a theft.
  3. Entering any public building during business hours without a permit.
  4. Entering or remaining on private property without lawful authority after being asked to leave by a person with authority to do so. Correct answer.

Explanation

Unlawful entry in DC generally involves entering or remaining on property without lawful authority after being asked to leave by someone with authority. Entry with intent to commit theft describes burglary, and the other options do not fit the offense.

Question 25DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC defendant is charged with a crime and the government seeks to introduce a recorded 911 call in which the caller identified the defendant as the assailant. The caller is unavailable at trial. Which doctrine is most relevant to admissibility?

  1. The parole evidence rule.
  2. The rule against perpetuities.
  3. The excited utterance and present sense impression exceptions, depending on the circumstances of the call. Correct answer.
  4. The best evidence rule, which bars all recordings.

Explanation

Out-of-court statements made under the stress of a startling event may qualify as excited utterances, and statements describing an event while perceiving it may qualify as present sense impressions. The rule against perpetuities, the best evidence rule, and the parol evidence rule do not govern this hearsay question.

Question 26DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer stops a driver for a burned-out taillight. During the stop, the officer asks the driver to step out of the vehicle. Under Fourth Amendment principles applied in the District of Columbia, the officer's request is best described as:

  1. Impermissible, because a traffic stop is complete once the officer issues a warning
  2. Impermissible, because exiting the vehicle requires probable cause that the driver committed a crime
  3. Permissible only if the officer first observes a weapon within reach of the driver
  4. Permissible, because ordering a driver out of a lawfully stopped vehicle is a reasonable de minimis intrusion Correct answer.

Explanation

Once a vehicle stop is lawful, an officer may order the occupants out as a routine safety measure without any additional suspicion; the intrusion is minor and reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Probable cause or a visible weapon is not required for the exit order itself, though a full search would demand more.

Question 27DC Criminal Law and Procedure

In DC Superior Court, a defendant is charged with a misdemeanor and asserts a right to a jury trial. Which statement correctly reflects DC practice?

  1. The Sixth Amendment jury right applies to serious offenses, and DC law generally limits jury trials to offenses punishable by more than 180 days Correct answer.
  2. A jury trial is available in any case where the defendant faces any period of incarceration
  3. The DC Constitution guarantees a jury trial in all criminal prosecutions, including petty offenses
  4. Jury trials in DC are available only in federal court, not in the local Superior Court

Explanation

The Sixth Amendment jury guarantee attaches to serious offenses, commonly measured by a potential sentence exceeding six months. DC practice follows that line, so misdemeanors punishable by 180 days or less are typically tried without a jury.

Question 28DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer observes a man standing on a public sidewalk at night holding a handgun in plain view. Under DC firearms law, which offense most directly applies to the mere possession of the unregistered pistol in public?

  1. Carrying a pistol without a license Correct answer.
  2. Unlawful entry
  3. Receiving stolen property
  4. Disorderly conduct

Explanation

DC law separately criminalizes carrying a pistol without a license, and possessing an unregistered firearm in public exposes a person to that charge. The other offenses address unrelated conduct, such as entry onto property or property crimes.

Question 29DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant is prosecuted in DC for a felony. The government seeks to introduce the defendant's prior conviction for armed robbery to impeach credibility. Under DC evidence principles, the court should:

  1. Automatically admit the conviction because any felony bears on truthfulness
  2. Exclude the conviction because prior crimes are never admissible for impeachment
  3. Weigh the conviction's probative value on truthfulness against unfair prejudice before admitting it Correct answer.
  4. Admit the conviction only if the defendant testifies and the prosecutor requests it in writing

Explanation

Impeachment by prior conviction requires the court to balance probative value regarding truthfulness against the danger of unfair prejudice. Armed robbery is not automatically admissible, and the trial judge retains discretion.

Question 30DC Criminal Law and Procedure

DC police arrest a suspect in a public place based on probable cause. Incident to that lawful arrest, officers may search:

  1. The suspect's person and the area within the suspect's immediate reach Correct answer.
  2. Any vehicle the suspect has ever driven
  3. The suspect's person only, with no area search permitted
  4. The suspect's home without a warrant or consent

Explanation

A search incident to a lawful arrest permits officers to search the arrestee's person and the area within the arrestee's immediate control to prevent weapons access and destruction of evidence. It does not extend to the home or unrelated vehicles.

Question 31DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC defendant is charged with burglary. At trial, the government offers evidence that the defendant fled from the scene when police arrived. The defense objects. The evidence is:

  1. Inadmissible because flight is not relevant to any element of burglary
  2. Admissible only if the defendant takes the stand and denies involvement
  3. Inadmissible unless the defendant is first convicted of a separate fleeing offense
  4. Admissible as circumstantial evidence of consciousness of guilt Correct answer.

Explanation

Flight from the scene may be offered as circumstantial evidence suggesting consciousness of guilt, and the jury may weigh it alongside other proof. The defendant need not testify or be separately convicted for the evidence to come in.

Question 32DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer applies for a warrant to search a residence. The affidavit relies on information from an unnamed informant. Under the Fourth Amendment, the magistrate must assess whether the informant's basis of knowledge and veracity establish:

  1. Probable cause to believe evidence will be found at the location Correct answer.
  2. Reasonable suspicion that the informant is truthful
  3. A mere suspicion that evidence exists
  4. Clear and convincing proof of criminal activity

Explanation

A warrant requires probable cause, and an informant's tip must be evaluated under the totality of the circumstances to determine whether probable cause exists. Reasonable suspicion and clear and convincing proof are different standards that do not govern warrant issuance.

Question 33DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant in DC is charged with murder and seeks to suppress a statement made during custodial interrogation. The officer asked questions without giving Miranda warnings. The statement is:

  1. Inadmissible for any purpose whatsoever
  2. Admissible because the questioning occurred at a police station
  3. Presumptively inadmissible in the government's case-in-chief, though it may be used for impeachment in some circumstances Correct answer.
  4. Admissible because the defendant was not physically coerced

Explanation

Statements obtained through custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings are generally excluded from the prosecution's case-in-chief. Limited impeachment use may be permitted when the defendant testifies inconsistently, so the absolute bar in one option is too broad.

Question 34DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer stops a person on the street based on reasonable suspicion of a recent robbery. The officer conducts a pat-down and feels a hard object in the person's pocket that the officer believes is a weapon. Under Terry principles, the officer may:

  1. Do nothing further because a pat-down cannot extend beyond the outer clothing
  2. Remove the object only after obtaining a warrant
  3. Reach in and remove the object because a pat-down was justified Correct answer.
  4. Arrest the person immediately without further inquiry

Explanation

When a lawful pat-down reveals an object the officer reasonably believes is a weapon, the officer may remove it to ensure safety. This is a limited extension of the protective search, not a full search requiring a warrant.

Question 35DC Criminal Law and Procedure

In DC, a defendant is charged with a crime and wants to call a witness who previously gave a sworn statement to police but now cannot be located. The prosecution objects. Under confrontation principles, the statement is most likely:

  1. Inadmissible unless the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the witness Correct answer.
  2. Admissible because the statement was sworn
  3. Inadmissible in all circumstances
  4. Admissible because the witness is unavailable

Explanation

Under the Confrontation Clause, testimonial statements by an unavailable witness are admissible only if the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine. Unavailability and the oath alone do not satisfy the requirement.

Question 36DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer witnesses a person commit a misdemeanor breach of the peace. Under DC arrest authority, the officer may arrest the person:

  1. Only after obtaining consent from a supervisor
  2. Only if the person flees
  3. Only with an arrest warrant
  4. Without a warrant because the offense occurred in the officer's presence Correct answer.

Explanation

An officer may make a warrantless arrest for a misdemeanor committed in the officer's presence. The presence requirement is satisfied when the officer personally observes the offense.

Question 37DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A defendant in DC is charged with distribution of narcotics. At trial, the government offers a laboratory report identifying the substance, and the analyst who prepared it does not testify. The defendant objects. The report is:

  1. Admissible because the defendant can subpoena the analyst
  2. Admissible because laboratory reports are business records
  3. Inadmissible because the government must always produce every analyst who touched the evidence
  4. Inadmissible if the report is testimonial and the analyst is unavailable without a prior opportunity to cross-examine Correct answer.

Explanation

A laboratory report prepared for prosecution is typically testimonial, so its admission without the analyst's testimony can violate the Confrontation Clause unless the defendant had a prior chance to cross-examine. The business-record label does not override confrontation protections.

Question 38DC Criminal Law and Procedure

In DC, which statement best describes the offense of unlawful entry?

  1. Taking property from another by force or fear
  2. Entering a vehicle without the owner's permission
  3. Entering or remaining on property against the express will of the lawful occupant Correct answer.
  4. Entering a dwelling at night with intent to commit a felony

Explanation

Unlawful entry criminalizes entering or remaining on property against the will of the person lawfully in charge. Burglary requires intent to commit a crime inside a dwelling, and robbery involves force or fear.

Question 39DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC officer conducts a traffic stop and, after completing the stop, continues to detain the driver for a canine sniff without reasonable suspicion. The sniff reveals contraband. The evidence is most likely:

  1. Inadmissible because the detention was unlawfully prolonged without reasonable suspicion Correct answer.
  2. Admissible because the officer had probable cause from the traffic violation
  3. Inadmissible because canine sniffs are per se unconstitutional
  4. Admissible because a canine sniff is never a search

Explanation

A traffic stop may not be extended beyond the time reasonably needed to complete its mission absent reasonable suspicion of other criminal activity. Evidence found through an unlawfully prolonged detention is subject to suppression.

Question 40DC Criminal Law and Procedure

A DC defendant is charged with assault and seeks to introduce evidence of the alleged victim's prior violent acts to show the victim was the first aggressor. Under DC evidence principles, this evidence is:

  1. Always inadmissible because it is character evidence
  2. Inadmissible unless the defendant files a motion in limine
  3. Admissible only if the victim was convicted of a felony
  4. Admissible when offered to show the victim's propensity for violence relevant to self-defense Correct answer.

Explanation

Evidence of a victim's prior violent acts may be admissible when relevant to a self-defense claim, such as showing the victim was the first aggressor. It is not barred categorically by the character evidence rule in that context.

Question 41Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

A recruit asks which amendment to the U.S. Constitution supplies the primary textual basis for applying most of the Bill of Rights against state and local governments. Which answer is correct?

  1. The Third Amendment
  2. The Fourteenth Amendment Correct answer.
  3. The Tenth Amendment
  4. The Seventh Amendment

Explanation

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has been used by the Supreme Court to incorporate most provisions of the Bill of Rights so they bind state and local actors, not just the federal government. The Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the states, and the Third and Seventh Amendments address quartering of soldiers and civil jury trials respectively, so neither serves as an incorporation vehicle.

Question 42Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

During a traffic stop, an officer orders a driver out of the vehicle and pats down the driver's outer clothing after observing a bulge consistent with a weapon. Which constitutional principle most directly supports the pat-down?

  1. The Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment permits preventive frisks of all detainees.
  2. The Fourth Amendment permits a full search incident to any traffic stop without additional justification.
  3. The Fourth Amendment permits a limited protective search for weapons when the officer has reasonable suspicion the person is armed and dangerous. Correct answer.
  4. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination authorizes a frisk to prevent the suspect from swallowing evidence.

Explanation

A protective pat-down is a limited intrusion justified by reasonable suspicion that a detainee may be armed, and it is confined to a search for weapons rather than evidence generally. The stop itself may be brief and lawful, but a frisk requires the additional suspicion of danger. The Fifth and Eighth Amendments do not authorize physical searches.

Question 43Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

An officer questions a suspect who has invoked the right to remain silent. Under Miranda doctrine, which statement best describes the consequence of continued interrogation?

  1. The invocation waives all later rights, including the right to counsel at trial.
  2. The invocation lasts only five minutes and then questioning may resume without restriction.
  3. Statements obtained after a clear invocation of the right to remain silent are generally inadmissible in the prosecution's case-in-chief. Correct answer.
  4. The invocation is ineffective unless the suspect also requests an attorney in the same breath.

Explanation

Once a suspect unambiguously invokes the right to remain silent, questioning must cease, and statements obtained in violation are ordinarily excluded from the prosecution's case-in-chief. The invocation does not require a simultaneous request for counsel. It does not waive trial rights, and it is not limited to a fixed short interval.

Question 44Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

A state law requires all applicants for a commercial driver's license to pass a written examination. A candidate who cannot read English challenges the requirement as violating equal protection. Which level of scrutiny applies to this classification?

  1. Absolute prohibition
  2. Strict scrutiny
  3. Rational basis review Correct answer.
  4. Intermediate scrutiny

Explanation

Classifications based on literacy or language ability, like most socioeconomic or educational requirements, are reviewed under the rational basis test because they do not involve a suspect class or fundamental right. The state need only show the requirement is rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest, such as highway safety. Strict and intermediate scrutiny apply to suspect classifications and quasi-suspect classifications respectively.

Question 45Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

An officer arrests a suspect in a public park based on probable cause. Which statement accurately reflects the constitutional rule regarding a warrantless public arrest?

  1. A warrantless public arrest is permitted only for felony offenses and never for misdemeanors.
  2. A warrantless arrest in a public place is permissible if supported by probable cause. Correct answer.
  3. A warrantless public arrest requires only a hunch that the person committed a crime.
  4. A warrant is always required for any arrest, whether in public or at home.

Explanation

The Fourth Amendment permits a warrantless arrest in a public place when the officer has probable cause to believe the person has committed a crime. The warrant requirement is heightened for entry into a home, but a public arrest does not require a warrant. Probable cause is more than a mere hunch, and the rule is not limited to felonies.

Question 46Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

A defendant is charged with a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail. The defendant requests appointed counsel but cannot afford an attorney. Under Sixth Amendment precedent, which statement is most accurate?

  1. Counsel must be appointed only if the actual sentence imposed includes imprisonment.
  2. Counsel is required only if the defendant is charged with a felony.
  3. Counsel is never required for misdemeanor offenses regardless of the sentence.
  4. Counsel must be appointed for any offense where imprisonment is actually imposed, even if the maximum is six months. Correct answer.

Explanation

The Sixth Amendment right to appointed counsel attaches in misdemeanor cases when the court actually imposes a sentence of imprisonment, even if the authorized maximum is six months or less. A suspended sentence with no actual incarceration generally does not trigger the right. The rule is not limited to felonies.

Question 47Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

An officer conducts a warrantless search of a closed container in the trunk of a car after lawfully arresting the driver and securing the passenger compartment. Which doctrine most directly governs the search of the container?

  1. The consent exception, which applies whenever a driver is arrested.
  2. The automobile exception, which permits a warrantless search of containers within a vehicle when there is probable cause to search the vehicle. Correct answer.
  3. The plain view doctrine, which permits searching closed containers whenever an officer is lawfully present.
  4. The search-incident-to-arrest exception, which permits a full search of the trunk after any arrest.

Explanation

Under the automobile exception, if officers have probable cause to believe a vehicle contains contraband or evidence, they may search the vehicle and closed containers within it without a warrant. The search-incident-to-arrest exception is limited to the arrestee's person and the area within immediate reach, not the trunk after the passenger compartment is secured. Plain view and consent require different predicates.

Question 48Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

A city council opens its meetings with a prayer delivered by clergy selected from a variety of faiths through a neutral process. A resident challenges the practice as an establishment of religion. Which principle most directly governs the analysis?

  1. Any prayer at a government meeting violates the Establishment Clause regardless of context.
  2. Legislative prayer is permissible when it is consistent with historical practice and does not coerce participation or denigrate other faiths. Correct answer.
  3. Legislative prayer is permissible only if delivered by government employees rather than clergy.
  4. Legislative prayer is permissible only if it is nonsectarian and avoids mentioning any deity.

Explanation

The Supreme Court has upheld legislative prayer that fits the long historical tradition of opening sessions with prayer, particularly when the selection process is neutral and the practice does not coerce or demean others. The analysis is context-specific and considers coercion and denominational favoritism. A categorical ban or a requirement of nonsectarian content is not the governing rule.

Question 49Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

A protester is arrested for burning an American flag during a political demonstration. Which statement best reflects current First Amendment doctrine?

  1. Flag burning may be prohibited because the flag is a national symbol that the government may protect from all disrespect.
  2. Flag burning is protected only if it occurs on private property.
  3. Flag burning is unprotected because it is conduct rather than speech.
  4. Flag burning as political expression is protected speech, and a statute criminalizing it generally violates the First Amendment. Correct answer.

Explanation

The Supreme Court has held that burning the flag as part of political protest is expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment, and statutes punishing it generally cannot survive. The government may not prohibit expression merely because it is offensive or disrespectful. The location of the protest does not determine whether the expression is protected.

Question 50Constitutional Law and Civil Rights

An officer stops a pedestrian and asks for identification without reasonable suspicion of any crime. The pedestrian refuses to answer and is arrested under a state stop-and-identify statute. Which constitutional concern is most directly implicated?

  1. The Seventh Amendment guarantees a jury trial for identification disputes.
  2. The Third Amendment prohibits requiring identification in peacetime.
  3. The Twenty-First Amendment governs state identification requirements.
  4. The Fourth Amendment requires reasonable suspicion to seize a person, and the Fifth Amendment limits compelled self-identification. Correct answer.

Explanation

A stop requires reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment, and compelled disclosure of identity can raise Fifth Amendment concerns depending on how the statute operates. The Supreme Court has upheld limited identification requirements in some contexts, but the constitutional analysis turns on suspicion and compulsion. The Seventh, Third, and Twenty-First Amendments have no bearing on pedestrian identification stops.