Chapter 11
- What was the old standard for the admissibility of confessions and admissions? Explain why that standard was difficult to apply.
- How did Miranda v. Arizona change the standard for admissibility of confessions and admissions? In your opinion, is it a change for the better? Explain your answer.
- Assume that the state legislature of Kansas passes a law providing that confessions are admissible in state court criminal cases as long as they are voluntary, even without the Miranda warnings. Is that law constitutional? Cite a case precedent and reasons for your answer.
- Distinguish between the Miranda warnings and the right to counsel. In what ways are they similar? In what ways are they different?
Chapter 12
- Assume that the Nebraska legislature passes a law providing that all crimes in Nebraska are to be tried by a six-member jury. Assume further that the same law also provides that a 5-to-1 vote for conviction results in conviction. Is that law constitutional? Explain your answer.
- There are two kinds of challenges the prosecutor and the defense lawyer can use when selecting a jury. How do these challenges differ? Which challenge is bad for the defendant and why?
- X, a man accused of rape, was tried and convicted by a jury made up of all women. Was his constitutional right to trial by a jury of peers violated? Justify your answer.
- A college criminal justice student is charged with selling drugs in a dormitory. Such a crime is a felony in the state. She has taken a few college courses in law and has some knowledge of criminal procedure and constitutional rights. Can she waive her right to a lawyer and insist on defending herself?
Submission Instructions:
