Texas State University
School of Criminal Justice
Ph.D. Comprehensive Exam for Law and Ethics
November 10, 2015
9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Directions: Choose Option One or Option Two. Answer completely, identifying each
section of your answer.
Save two electronic copies of your answer (one with your ID number assigned to you, the
other with your ID number and name). Email both copies to Cybele Hinson
ch56@txstate.edu. Print and turn in a hard copy as well with both your ID number and
name on it.
Option One.
Assume a hypothetical case wherein a state is defending the use of “stingrays” – cell phone
intercept towers. Evidently, law enforcement agencies have been using these devices all over the
country but not identifying their use in probable cause affidavits. In fact, the Florida branch of
the ACLU released a set of internal police emails showing that the U.S. Marshalls Task Force in
Tampa was asking police to seal court affidavits mentioning the use of stingrays and to file new,
intentionally misleading/false affidavits listing the information obtained from stingrays as
coming from "a confidential source." The intercept devices mimic cellphone towers and can be
used to “intercept calls and SMS texts, including two-factor authentication information; They
can track a phone's location; Deploy geo-targeted spam; Issue operator messages that reconfigure
the phone, installing permanent backdoor mechanisms; and/or probe the phone's SIM card for its
encryption key and other stored information.”*
Your legal argument can be either arguing the legality of these devices without a warrant or the
illegality of their use without a warrant using relevant case law. Also, once complete, indicate
whether your argument is consistent with each of the following and why. To explain why it is or
is not consistent, you should utilize relevant definitional elements.
Natural law
Positivism
Legal Realism
Critical Legal Theory
Now moving from law to ethics explain whether your argument can be supported by each of the
following ethical systems:
Social Contract
Utilitarianism
Ethical Formalism (Kant)
Aristotlian virtue theory
*http://blackbag.gawker.com/those-interceptor-fake-cell-phone-towers-are-in-washi-1637721419
Option Two.
2. Assume a hypothetical case wherein a state is the appellee in a case where a man is suing to
be able to have several legal wives. The case is before the Supreme Court with a variety of
advocacy groups on both sides of the argument. Lay out the argument for or against the legal
argument that the state must recognize polygamy using relevant case law. Now explain whether
your argument is consistent with each of the following legal philosophies and why.
Natural law
Positivism
Legal Realism
Critical Legal Theory
Now moving from law to ethics explain whether your argument is consistent with each of the
following ethical systems. (For both legal philosophies and ethical systems, make sure you
provide definitional elements to illustrate your understanding of the concepts).
Social Contract
Utilitarianism
Ethical Formalism (Kant)
Aristotlian virtue theory