The general rule is that newly announced appellate decisions

Question # 00656970 Posted By: dr.tony Updated on: 03/01/2018 12:06 PM Due on: 03/01/2018
Subject Political Science Topic General Political Science Tutorials:
Question
Dot Image

38. The general rule is that newly announced appellate decisions are normally to be applied retroactively as well as prospectively.

A) True B) False

39. A public official who is authorized to issue search warrants is called a notary public.

A) True B) False

40. In order for a court decision on a legal point to be respected as precedent, the court's decision must be final and supported by a majority of the judges, and it must be reported.

A) True B) False

41. Which of the following statements is true about the role of the Constitution in our republic?

A) There is no law higher than the Constitution, and all other federal laws enacted must comply with the mandates of the Constitution.

B) The Constitution establishes a floor with respect to individual rights, but not a ceiling; that is, the government may provide more freedoms than the Constitution mandates.

C) State laws cannot contradict the national Constitution.

D) All of the above

E) None of the above

42. A, a resident of the state of California, while driving his car in New Mexico, negligently runs over B, a resident of Texas. A court using the lex loci delicti commissi approach would apply the substantive law of

A) California.

B)New Mexico.

C) Texas.

D) the forum.

E) None of the above


43. In a contractual dispute, depending on the facts involved, the court may apply the law of

the place of which of the following?

A) The state where the action was instituted (lex fori)

B) The state whose law the parties intend should govern

C) The state that has the greatest concern with the event and parties (significant

relationship or center of gravity test)

D) All of the above

E) Two of the above

44. When a case for which there is no precedent comes before it, a court can

A) look to the decisions of courts in England.

B) consider the morals of society.

C) use the dicta of other cases as support for its decision.

D) All of the above

E) None of the above

45. A Nevada corporation obtained a judgment against a Texas resident for a gambling debt

legitimately incurred in Las Vegas. In a Texas court, a state in which gambling is illegal,

the Nevada judgment is

A) entitled to full faith and credit and is enforceable.

B) not entitled to res judicata and is unenforceable.

C) entitled to comity and is enforceable.

D) unenforceable under the Supremacy Clause.

E) entitled to full faith and credit but is not enforceable.

46. The defendant was convicted of aggravated assault, and he appealed, claiming that,

during the trial, some of his prior inconsistent statements made to the police without

Miranda warnings were used by prosecutors. He argued that the Fifth Amendment

protection against compulsory self-incrimination operates to exclude the prosecution's

use of voluntary statements of the accused, made to the police without Miranda

warnings, for the purpose of impeaching credibility on cross-examination, as was done in

his case. Who will decide whether or not the use of a confession given in the absence of

Miranda warnings violates the Fifth Amendment?

A) Congress, if it is a federal case

B) A state legislature, if it is a state case

C) A state supreme court, if it is a state case

D) None of the above. The judiciary is responsible for interpreting the provisions of the

Constitution.

E) All of the above decides at one point in the process.


47. A tavern sold liquor to a drunken patron who was subsequently involved as a driver in a

fatal motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff was rendered a quadriplegic as a result.

Prevailing precedent in this jurisdiction provides that the tavern does not owe a duty to

third-party motorists to guard against injuries caused by patrons who become intoxicated

at their place of business. If the plaintiff appeals the trial court's granting of the defendant

tavern's motion to dismiss, could the state Supreme Court overrule the precedent and

recognize the tavern's responsibility and liability for the plaintiff's injuries?

A) Yes, but the new precedent can only be applied to subsequent cases.

B) Yes, if the precedent is no longer appropriate because of changing economic,

political, and social conditions.

C) No, not unless the legislature changes the precedent by statute.

D) No, the doctrine of stare decisis prevents precedents from being overruled without

exception.

E) No, if the precedent can't be applied to subsequent cases.

48. The federal minimum wage law requires that most workers be paid at least $7.25 per

hour. A governor of a small industrial state, in which the standard of living is

considerably below national levels, perceives that some employers might be willing to

hire more workers if the amount were lowered. In order to increase the general welfare

of the citizens of this state, he proposes to the legislature a bill lowering the minimum

wage in certain industries and especially for certain age groups. Such a state act would

probably be declared unconstitutional because of the

A) Full Faith and Credit Clause.

B) political question doctrine.

C) First Amendment.

D) Supremacy Clause.

E) None of the above. It is a constitutional exercise of the state's police power.

49. A final judgment or decree rendered upon the merits, without fraud or collusion, by a

court of competent jurisdiction, is conclusive of rights, questions, and facts in issue as to

the parties and their privies, and is a complete bar to any subsequent action on the same

cause of action between the parties, or those in privity with them. This statement explains

A) the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

B) dictum.

C) stare decisis.

D) sovereignty.

E) res judicata.


50. A Kentucky court was confronted with the issue of whether or not a court has the power

to permit a kidney to be removed from an incompetent ward of the state, upon petition

from his mother, for the purpose of being transplanted into his brother, who is dying from

kidney disease. There is no statute or prior common law decision to guide the court.

What can the court do?

A) It must abstain from making a decision if there is no statute that permits the order,

since courts can only interpret statutes and constitutional provisions.

B) It can decide the issue, but only if the decision is unanimous, because only

unanimous appellate decisions have value as precedent.

C) It must wait for the legislature to pass a statute, since common law courts do not have

inherent power to determine what is the law and set precedents unless the

Constitution is involved.

D) It can decide the issue relying on the public interest, tradition, justice, and morality,

even if there is no common law decision or statute governing the situation.

E) It must rely on common law and statutes pertaining to the situation.

Dot Image
Tutorials for this Question
  1. Tutorial # 00655920 Posted By: dr.tony Posted on: 03/01/2018 12:07 PM
    Puchased By: 2
    Tutorial Preview
    The solution of The general rule is that newly announced appellate decisions...
    Attachments
    The_general_rule_is_that_newly_announced_appellate_decisions.ZIP (18.96 KB)

Great! We have found the solution of this question!

Whatsapp Lisa