The Courtroom Amendments (5, 6, 7) Quiz

Approved & Edited by ProProfs Editorial Team
The editorial team at ProProfs Quizzes consists of a select group of subject experts, trivia writers, and quiz masters who have authored over 10,000 quizzes taken by more than 100 million users. This team includes our in-house seasoned quiz moderators and subject matter experts. Our editorial experts, spread across the world, are rigorously trained using our comprehensive guidelines to ensure that you receive the highest quality quizzes.
Learn about Our Editorial Process
| By Wmsclusterm
W
Wmsclusterm
Community Contributor
Quizzes Created: 4 | Total Attempts: 1,955
Questions: 10 | Attempts: 827

SettingsSettingsSettings
Amendment Quizzes & Trivia

This quiz will help you to see if you understood this website and the Courtroom Amendments.


Questions and Answers
  • 1. 

    When people says, “Taking the Fifth”, what do they mean?

    • A.

      You can’t be charged twice.

    • B.

      The Fifth Amendment

    • C.

      The witness does not have to speak in court.

    • D.

      You have the right to a jury.

    • E.

      None of the above

    Correct Answer
    C. The witness does not have to speak in court.
    Explanation
    When people say "Taking the Fifth," they are referring to the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This amendment provides individuals with the right to remain silent and not incriminate themselves in a court of law. Therefore, the correct answer is "The witness does not have to speak in court." This phrase is often used when someone refuses to answer questions or provide testimony that may implicate themselves in a crime or wrongdoing.

    Rate this question:

  • 2. 

    Was Ernesto Miranda in the Miranda v. Arizona case found guilty or not guilty?

    • A.

      Guilty

    • B.

      Not guilty

    • C.

      No one knows for sure

    • D.

      Miranda never went to court.

    • E.

      None of the above

    Correct Answer
    B. Not guilty
    Explanation
    In the Miranda v. Arizona case, Ernesto Miranda was found not guilty. This landmark case involved the issue of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court ruled that Miranda's confession was inadmissible in court because he had not been informed of his right to remain silent and have an attorney present during police questioning. This decision led to the establishment of the Miranda warning, which requires law enforcement officers to inform individuals of their rights before custodial interrogations.

    Rate this question:

  • 3. 

    Why do we have the right to a lawyer?

    • A.

      Colonist defended themselves with no lawyers and they were always found guilty.

    • B.

      Great Britain didn’t allow the colonist a lawyer.

    • C.

      Many people thought that there should be someone who knew the law to help the accuser and accused.

    • D.

      A homeless man didn’t have lawyer and was found guilty of crime.

    • E.

      All of the above

    Correct Answer
    D. A homeless man didn’t have lawyer and was found guilty of crime.
    Explanation
    The correct answer is "A homeless man didn't have a lawyer and was found guilty of a crime." This answer supports the idea that everyone should have the right to a lawyer, as it highlights a specific example of someone who did not have legal representation and suffered negative consequences as a result. This example emphasizes the importance of legal representation in ensuring a fair trial and protecting individuals' rights.

    Rate this question:

  • 4. 

    What is NOT requirement for a trial by jury?

    • A.

      The case follows the 1791 English Common Law.

    • B.

      The case takes place in a state court.

    • C.

      The plaintiff wants money from defendant.

    • D.

      The rights between private citizens are disobeyed.

    • E.

      All of the above

    Correct Answer
    B. The case takes place in a state court.
    Explanation
    The requirement for a trial by jury is that the case must take place in a federal court, not a state court.

    Rate this question:

  • 5. 

    What caused the king and the Parliament to make a new court for the colonists without a jury?

    • A.

      The colonists didn’t want a jury.

    • B.

      The king and the Parliament felt that a jury gave too much power to the colonists.

    • C.

      The colonies didn’t have large population.

    • D.

      The jury mostly found the colonist innocent of smuggling, even when there was enough evidence that proved otherwise.

    • E.

      All of the above

    Correct Answer
    D. The jury mostly found the colonist innocent of smuggling, even when there was enough evidence that proved otherwise.
    Explanation
    The correct answer is that the jury mostly found the colonists innocent of smuggling, even when there was enough evidence that proved otherwise. This suggests that the king and the Parliament decided to create a new court without a jury because they felt that the jury system was not effective in convicting smugglers. They believed that the colonists were abusing the power of the jury and getting away with illegal activities.

    Rate this question:

  • 6. 

    What does the Sixth Amendment cover?

    • A.

      Right to a speedy trial

    • B.

      Confronting the witness

    • C.

      Right to a lawyer

    • D.

      All of the above

    • E.

      None of the above

    Correct Answer
    D. All of the above
    Explanation
    The Sixth Amendment covers the right to a speedy trial, which ensures that a defendant is not kept waiting for an extended period before their trial begins. It also covers the right to confront witnesses, allowing the defendant to question and challenge the credibility of those testifying against them. Additionally, it guarantees the right to a lawyer, ensuring that defendants have legal representation to protect their rights and interests throughout the criminal justice process. Therefore, the correct answer is "All of the above."

    Rate this question:

  • 7. 

    What kind of case doesn’t apply to the Seventh Amendment?

    • A.

      Civil cases

    • B.

      Criminal cases

    • C.

      All of the above

    • D.

      None of the above

    Correct Answer
    B. Criminal cases
    Explanation
    The Seventh Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial in civil cases, meaning cases that involve disputes between private parties. However, this right does not apply to criminal cases, which involve offenses against the state and are prosecuted by the government. Therefore, the correct answer is "Criminal cases."

    Rate this question:

  • 8. 

    What happens when there is “witness tampering”?

    • A.

      Nothing

    • B.

      There's a retrial with a different jury.

    • C.

      The person responsible for it is ordered to leave the jury.

    • D.

      The court still allows that jury to decide verdict.

    • E.

      None of the above

    Correct Answer
    B. There's a retrial with a different jury.
    Explanation
    When there is "witness tampering," it refers to the act of interfering with or influencing a witness in a legal case. This can involve bribing, threatening, or manipulating the witness to change their testimony or withhold information. In such cases, the integrity of the trial is compromised, and a retrial with a different jury is typically ordered to ensure a fair and impartial process. This allows for a new set of jurors who have not been influenced by the tampering to evaluate the evidence and reach a verdict based on the facts presented.

    Rate this question:

  • 9. 

    Double Jeopardy is…

    • A.

      When you can’t be tried for a case with the same facts twice

    • B.

      When you cannot be charged twice

    • C.

      When the defendant can’t be tried in court again, if he/she’s acquitted

    • D.

      All of the above

    • E.

      None of the above

    Correct Answer
    D. All of the above
    Explanation
    Double Jeopardy refers to the legal principle that protects individuals from being tried multiple times for the same offense. It ensures that once a person has been acquitted or convicted of a crime, they cannot be tried again for the same offense using the same facts. This principle prevents individuals from being subjected to multiple prosecutions for the same act, safeguarding their rights and preventing potential harassment or abuse by the legal system. Therefore, the correct answer is "All of the above" as it encompasses the different aspects of Double Jeopardy.

    Rate this question:

  • 10. 

    What rights of Ernesto Miranda’s in the Miranda v. Arizona case were violated?

    • A.

      Fifth and Sixth Amendments

    • B.

      Seventh Amendment

    • C.

      Sixth Amendment

    • D.

      Fifth Amendment

    Correct Answer
    A. Fifth and Sixth Amendments
    Explanation
    In the Miranda v. Arizona case, the rights of Ernesto Miranda that were violated were the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. The Fifth Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination and ensures due process of law, while the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to legal counsel and a fair trial. In this case, Miranda was not informed of his right to remain silent and his right to an attorney, which violated both of these constitutional rights.

    Rate this question:

Back to Top Back to top
Advertisement
×

Wait!
Here's an interesting quiz for you.

We have other quizzes matching your interest.