Pat Dunn
Quiz von , erstellt am more than 1 year ago

Quiz am Police powers mid term review, erstellt von Pat Dunn am 06/11/2015.

11
1
0
Keine Merkmale angegeben
Pat Dunn
Erstellt von Pat Dunn vor mehr als 8 Jahre
Schließen

Police powers mid term review

Frage 1 von 23

1

A citizen can make an arrest if they have reasonable grounds to believe that someone has committed a criminal offence anywhere.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 2 von 23

1

A citizen can make an arrest they have reasonable grounds to believe that somebody has committed an indictable offence anywhere.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 3 von 23

1

A citizen can make an arrest if they find a person committing an indictable offence anywhere.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 4 von 23

1

A citizen cannot make an arrest if they find someone committing a breach of peace.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 5 von 23

1

A citizen can make an arrest if they have reasonable grounds to believe that someone has committed a criminal offence and AND is escaping from and is freshly pursued by person(s) who have lawful authority to arrest

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 6 von 23

1

Fraudulently Obtaining Transportation Sec 393 (3) is an example of a indictable offence

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 7 von 23

1

Take Motor Vehicle Without Owners Consent Sec 355 (1) CC is an example of a summary conviction offence.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 8 von 23

1

Weapons Trafficking is an example of a summary conviction offence.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 9 von 23

1

Check all that are summary conviction offences

Wähle eine oder mehr der folgenden:

  • Nudity Sec 174 (1) CC

  • Trespass at Night Sec 177 cc

  • Alarming her Majesty Sec 49 CC

  • Inciting Mutiny Sec 53 CC

  • Harassing phone calls Sec 372(3) CC

Erklärung

Frage 10 von 23

1

Theft under $5000 is a dual procedure offence

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 11 von 23

1

Possession of Firearm Knowing Possession is Unauthorized is a dual procedure offence.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 12 von 23

1

Dual procedure offences are ALWAYS treated as indictable for arrest purposes

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 13 von 23

1

The police officer chooses to prosecute the dual procedure offence as summary conviction or indictable

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 14 von 23

1

Check all the answers that are considered 469 offences.

Wähle eine oder mehr der folgenden:

  • Treason Sec 47 CC

  • Murder Sec 235 CC

  • Piracy Sec 74 CC

  • Harassing phone calls Sec 372(3) CC

  • Possession of small amounts of Schedule 2 Sec 4(5) CDSA

  • tempt to commit a S/C offence Sec 24(1)CC

Erklärung

Frage 15 von 23

1

Anyone who (legally) arrests someone must turn the prisoner over to a peace officer (usually the police) forthwith.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 16 von 23

1

Forthwith = instantly regardless of circumstances

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 17 von 23

1

As a Civilian – Can you search that person you have arrested?

Wähle eine der folgenden:

  • Yes

  • No

Erklärung

Frage 18 von 23

1

A citizen can make an arrest if they believe a suspect is wanted on a warrant

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 19 von 23

1

Warrants to arrest are valid throughout the COUNTRY in which the warrant to arrest was created.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 20 von 23

1

If you receive information from CPIC that a Warrant exists for the arrest of an Individual. Do you the Peace Officer Need the Warrant with you to arrest this party who is wanted on that warrant.

Wähle eins der folgenden:

  • WAHR
  • FALSCH

Erklärung

Frage 21 von 23

1

CASE LAW:

The defense argued that the accused had returned to the store to continue to steal, thus the offence was still continuing. The crown was arguing that this situation was not “on-going” in nature and that the shopkeeper had no rights as a citizen to make the arrest. Based on the evidence, the charges were dismissed against the shopkeeper.

Wähle eine der folgenden:

  • R. VS CHEN

  • R. VS MANN

  • R. VS FEENEY

Erklärung

Frage 22 von 23

1

CASE LAW:

On December 23, 2000, in Winnipeg at around midnight, two police officers responded to a break and enter. While searching the neighbourhood, they spotted a young man matching the description of the suspect. He was described as a 21 year-old, 5 foot 8, Aboriginal male in a black jacket. The officers stopped the man, asked him some questions, and then gave him a pat-down. When patting the man down, the officer noticed a soft object in one of his pockets. The officer reached in and pulled out a bag containing 27 grams of marihuana.

Justice Laccobucci held that where a police officer detains a suspect on reasonable grounds they are allowed to give a pat-down only as a protective measure. Any search for the purposes of detecting and collecting evidence will not have been on reasonable grounds

Wähle eine der folgenden:

  • R VS CHEN

  • R VS FEENEY

  • R VS MANN

Erklärung

Frage 23 von 23

1

CASE LAW:
The police, during a murder investigation in 1991, entered the accused's house (an equipment trailer) without permission. When they received no answer at the door, they entered, roused the accused, touched his leg, ordered him to get up and took him to the front of the trailer for better lighting. The police arrested him after seeing blood on his shirt. Following a caution with respect to the right to counsel but not the right to immediate counsel, the police asked the accused a couple of questions which he answered. The accused's shirt was seized and he was taken to the police detachment where, before the accused had consulted with counsel, further statements and the accused's fingerprints were taken. The police seized cash, cigarettes and shoes under a warrant obtained on the basis of the initial search of the trailer (the shirt and shoes), the initial interview (the shoes) and the later interview at the detachment (the cash under the mattress).

Wähle eine der folgenden:

  • R VS GODOY

  • R VS FEENEY

  • R VS MANN

Erklärung