Correction Officer Reading Comprehension Practice Test

Following are several reading passages. Answer the questions that come after each, based solely on the information in the passages.

Stalking is defined as the “willful, malicious, and repeated following and harassing of another person.” The act of stalking can probably be traced back to the earliest episodes of human history, but in the United States, no substantive law existed to protect the victims of stalkers until 1990. Prior to this, the most that police officials could do was arrest the stalker for a minor offense or suggest the victim obtain a restraining order, a civil remedy often ignored by the offender. Frightened victims had their worst fears confirmed: They would have to be harmed—or killed—before anything could be done.

Stalking was brought before the public eye in 1989 by the stalking-murder of television star Rebecca Schaeffer, followed by the 1990 stalking-murders of four Orange County women in a single six-week period. When it was discovered that one of the Orange County victims had a restraining order in her purse when her stalker murdered her, California reacted by drafting the first anti-stalking law. Now, most states have similar laws.

The solution is not perfect: Some stalkers are too mentally disturbed or obsessed to fear or understand the meaning of a prison term, and on the flip side, there is the danger, however small, of abuse of the law, particularly in marital disputes. Most importantly, law enforcement officials and general society need to be better educated about stalking, especially about its often sexual underpinnings. (The majority of stalking victims are women terrorized by former husbands or boyfriends.)

But the laws are a vast improvement, and they carry the threat of felony penalties of up to ten years in prison for those who would attempt to control or possess others through intimidation and terror.

Which of the following best expresses the main idea of the passage?

Following are several reading passages. Answer the questions that come after each, based solely on the information in the passages.

Stalking is defined as the “willful, malicious, and repeated following and harassing of another person.” The act of stalking can probably be traced back to the earliest episodes of human history, but in the United States, no substantive law existed to protect the victims of stalkers until 1990. Prior to this, the most that police officials could do was arrest the stalker for a minor offense or suggest the victim obtain a restraining order, a civil remedy often ignored by the offender. Frightened victims had their worst fears confirmed: They would have to be harmed—or killed—before anything could be done.

Stalking was brought before the public eye in 1989 by the stalking-murder of television star Rebecca Schaeffer, followed by the 1990 stalking-murders of four Orange County women in a single six-week period. When it was discovered that one of the Orange County victims had a restraining order in her purse when her stalker murdered her, California reacted by drafting the first anti-stalking law. Now, most states have similar laws.

The solution is not perfect: Some stalkers are too mentally disturbed or obsessed to fear or understand the meaning of a prison term, and on the flip side, there is the danger, however small, of abuse of the law, particularly in marital disputes. Most importantly, law enforcement officials and general society need to be better educated about stalking, especially about its often sexual underpinnings. (The majority of stalking victims are women terrorized by former husbands or boyfriends.)

But the laws are a vast improvement, and they carry the threat of felony penalties of up to ten years in prison for those who would attempt to control or possess others through intimidation and terror.

Which of the following is NOT mentioned in the passage as a weakness of the new anti- stalking legislation?

Following are several reading passages. Answer the questions that come after each, based solely on the information in the passages.

Stalking is defined as the “willful, malicious, and repeated following and harassing of another person.” The act of stalking can probably be traced back to the earliest episodes of human history, but in the United States, no substantive law existed to protect the victims of stalkers until 1990. Prior to this, the most that police officials could do was arrest the stalker for a minor offense or suggest the victim obtain a restraining order, a civil remedy often ignored by the offender. Frightened victims had their worst fears confirmed: They would have to be harmed—or killed—before anything could be done.

Stalking was brought before the public eye in 1989 by the stalking-murder of television star Rebecca Schaeffer, followed by the 1990 stalking-murders of four Orange County women in a single six-week period. When it was discovered that one of the Orange County victims had a restraining order in her purse when her stalker murdered her, California reacted by drafting the first anti-stalking law. Now, most states have similar laws.

The solution is not perfect: Some stalkers are too mentally disturbed or obsessed to fear or understand the meaning of a prison term, and on the flip side, there is the danger, however small, of abuse of the law, particularly in marital disputes. Most importantly, law enforcement officials and general society need to be better educated about stalking, especially about its often sexual underpinnings. (The majority of stalking victims are women terrorized by former husbands or boyfriends.)

But the laws are a vast improvement, and they carry the threat of felony penalties of up to ten years in prison for those who would attempt to control or possess others through intimidation and terror.

Based on the passage, why are restraining orders ineffective in preventing stalking?

Following are several reading passages. Answer the questions that come after each, based solely on the information in the passages.

Stalking is defined as the “willful, malicious, and repeated following and harassing of another person.” The act of stalking can probably be traced back to the earliest episodes of human history, but in the United States, no substantive law existed to protect the victims of stalkers until 1990. Prior to this, the most that police officials could do was arrest the stalker for a minor offense or suggest the victim obtain a restraining order, a civil remedy often ignored by the offender. Frightened victims had their worst fears confirmed: They would have to be harmed—or killed—before anything could be done.

Stalking was brought before the public eye in 1989 by the stalking-murder of television star Rebecca Schaeffer, followed by the 1990 stalking-murders of four Orange County women in a single six-week period. When it was discovered that one of the Orange County victims had a restraining order in her purse when her stalker murdered her, California reacted by drafting the first anti-stalking law. Now, most states have similar laws.

The solution is not perfect: Some stalkers are too mentally disturbed or obsessed to fear or understand the meaning of a prison term, and on the flip side, there is the danger, however small, of abuse of the law, particularly in marital disputes. Most importantly, law enforcement officials and general society need to be better educated about stalking, especially about its often sexual underpinnings. (The majority of stalking victims are women terrorized by former husbands or boyfriends.)

But the laws are a vast improvement, and they carry the threat of felony penalties of up to ten years in prison for those who would attempt to control or possess others through intimidation and terror.

Which of the following is NOT a stated or implied motive for stalking?

Reading Comprehension: 2

Sentencing is the final ruling of a judge in a legal proceeding. Types of sentences include incarceration, monetary fines, and probation or other community supervision. When multiple crimes have been committed, the sentences can be served concurrently, where the period of incarceration equals the length of the longest sentence. The sentences can also be served consecutively, where the length of time served is the total of all sentences.

There are several sentencing models, including indeterminate sentencing, where a minimum and maximum length of incarceration are stated, and after serving the minimum sentence, the person may be released on parole or another type of supervision based, in part, on institutional behavior. Determinate sentences provide a fixed length of incarceration. Mandatory sentences, such as three-strikes laws, allow the judge no discretion regarding the length of the sentence—once a defendant is convicted of a given offense, the sentence has been legislatively set. Today, there are a number of goals for sentencing, including general and specific deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, and restitution.

According to the passage, a concurrently served sentence

Reading Comprehension: 2

Sentencing is the final ruling of a judge in a legal proceeding. Types of sentences include incarceration, monetary fines, and probation or other community supervision. When multiple crimes have been committed, the sentences can be served concurrently, where the period of incarceration equals the length of the longest sentence. The sentences can also be served consecutively, where the length of time served is the total of all sentences.

There are several sentencing models, including indeterminate sentencing, where a minimum and maximum length of incarceration are stated, and after serving the minimum sentence, the person may be released on parole or another type of supervision based, in part, on institutional behavior. Determinate sentences provide a fixed length of incarceration. Mandatory sentences, such as three-strikes laws, allow the judge no discretion regarding the length of the sentence—once a defendant is convicted of a given offense, the sentence has been legislatively set. Today, there are a number of goals for sentencing, including general and specific deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, and restitution.

The main idea of this passage is

Reading Comprehension: 2

Sentencing is the final ruling of a judge in a legal proceeding. Types of sentences include incarceration, monetary fines, and probation or other community supervision. When multiple crimes have been committed, the sentences can be served concurrently, where the period of incarceration equals the length of the longest sentence. The sentences can also be served consecutively, where the length of time served is the total of all sentences.

There are several sentencing models, including indeterminate sentencing, where a minimum and maximum length of incarceration are stated, and after serving the minimum sentence, the person may be released on parole or another type of supervision based, in part, on institutional behavior. Determinate sentences provide a fixed length of incarceration. Mandatory sentences, such as three-strikes laws, allow the judge no discretion regarding the length of the sentence—once a defendant is convicted of a given offense, the sentence has been legislatively set. Today, there are a number of goals for sentencing, including general and specific deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, and restitution.

Mandatory sentences are determined by

Reading Comprehension: 3

In recent years, issues of public and personal safety have become a major concern to many Americans. Violent incidents in fast-food restaurants, libraries, hospitals, schools, and offices have led many to seek greater security inside and outside their homes. Sales of burglar alarms and high-tech security devices such as motion detectors and video monitors have skyrocketed in the past decade. Convenience stores and post offices have joined banks and jewelry stores in barricading staff behind iron bars and safety glass enclosures. Communities employ private security forces and some homeowners feel the need to keep trained attack dogs on their premises. While some people have sympathy for the impetus behind these efforts, there is also a concern that these measures will create a siege mentality, leading to distrust among people that could foster a dangerous isolationism within neighborhoods and among neighbors.

The passage suggests which of the following about community security?

Reading Comprehension: 3

In recent years, issues of public and personal safety have become a major concern to many Americans. Violent incidents in fast-food restaurants, libraries, hospitals, schools, and offices have led many to seek greater security inside and outside their homes. Sales of burglar alarms and high-tech security devices such as motion detectors and video monitors have skyrocketed in the past decade. Convenience stores and post offices have joined banks and jewelry stores in barricading staff behind iron bars and safety glass enclosures. Communities employ private security forces and some homeowners feel the need to keep trained attack dogs on their premises. While some people have sympathy for the impetus behind these efforts, there is also a concern that these measures will create a siege mentality, leading to distrust among people that could foster a dangerous isolationism within neighborhoods and among neighbors.

The word foster in the last sentence of the pas- sage most nearly means

Reading Comprehension: 3

In recent years, issues of public and personal safety have become a major concern to many Americans. Violent incidents in fast-food restaurants, libraries, hospitals, schools, and offices have led many to seek greater security inside and outside their homes. Sales of burglar alarms and high-tech security devices such as motion detectors and video monitors have skyrocketed in the past decade. Convenience stores and post offices have joined banks and jewelry stores in barricading staff behind iron bars and safety glass enclosures. Communities employ private security forces and some homeowners feel the need to keep trained attack dogs on their premises. While some people have sympathy for the impetus behind these efforts, there is also a concern that these measures will create a siege mentality, leading to distrust among people that could foster a dangerous isolationism within neighborhoods and among neighbors.

The author believes that

Reading Comprehension: 3

In recent years, issues of public and personal safety have become a major concern to many Americans. Violent incidents in fast-food restaurants, libraries, hospitals, schools, and offices have led many to seek greater security inside and outside their homes. Sales of burglar alarms and high-tech security devices such as motion detectors and video monitors have skyrocketed in the past decade. Convenience stores and post offices have joined banks and jewelry stores in barricading staff behind iron bars and safety glass enclosures. Communities employ private security forces and some homeowners feel the need to keep trained attack dogs on their premises. While some people have sympathy for the impetus behind these efforts, there is also a concern that these measures will create a siege mentality, leading to distrust among people that could foster a dangerous isolationism within neighborhoods and among neighbors.

In the last sentence, the phrase siege mentality means

Reading Comprehension: 4

Hearsay evidence, which is the secondhand reporting of a statement, is allowed in court only when the truth of the statement is irrelevant. Hearsay that depends on the statement’s truthfulness is inadmissible because: the witness does not appear in court and swear an oath to tell the truth; his or her demeanor when making the statement is not visible to the jury; and the accuracy of the statement cannot be tested under cross-examination and to introduce it would be to deprive the accused of the constitutional right to confront the accuser. Hearsay is admissible, however, when the truth of the statement is unimportant. If, for example, a defendant claims to have been unconscious at a certain time, and a witness claims that the defendant actually spoke to her at that time, this evidence would be admissible because the truth of what the defendant actually said is irrelevant.

The main purpose of the passage is to

Reading Comprehension: 4

Hearsay evidence, which is the secondhand reporting of a statement, is allowed in court only when the truth of the statement is irrelevant. Hearsay that depends on the statement’s truthfulness is inadmissible because: the witness does not appear in court and swear an oath to tell the truth; his or her demeanor when making the statement is not visible to the jury; and the accuracy of the statement cannot be tested under cross-examination and to introduce it would be to deprive the accused of the constitutional right to confront the accuser. Hearsay is admissible, however, when the truth of the statement is unimportant. If, for example, a defendant claims to have been unconscious at a certain time, and a witness claims that the defendant actually spoke to her at that time, this evidence would be admissible because the truth of what the defendant actually said is irrelevant.

Which of the following is NOT a reason given in the passage for the inadmissibility of hearsay evidence?

Reading Comprehension: 4

Hearsay evidence, which is the secondhand reporting of a statement, is allowed in court only when the truth of the statement is irrelevant. Hearsay that depends on the statement’s truthfulness is inadmissible because: the witness does not appear in court and swear an oath to tell the truth; his or her demeanor when making the statement is not visible to the jury; and the accuracy of the statement cannot be tested under cross-examination and to introduce it would be to deprive the accused of the constitutional right to confront the accuser. Hearsay is admissible, however, when the truth of the statement is unimportant. If, for example, a defendant claims to have been unconscious at a certain time, and a witness claims that the defendant actually spoke to her at that time, this evidence would be admissible because the truth of what the defendant actually said is irrelevant.

How does the passage explain the proper use of hearsay evidence?

Reading Comprehension: 4

Hearsay evidence, which is the secondhand reporting of a statement, is allowed in court only when the truth of the statement is irrelevant. Hearsay that depends on the statement’s truthfulness is inadmissible because: the witness does not appear in court and swear an oath to tell the truth; his or her demeanor when making the statement is not visible to the jury; and the accuracy of the statement cannot be tested under cross-examination and to introduce it would be to deprive the accused of the constitutional right to confront the accuser. Hearsay is admissible, however, when the truth of the statement is unimportant. If, for example, a defendant claims to have been unconscious at a certain time, and a witness claims that the defendant actually spoke to her at that time, this evidence would be admissible because the truth of what the defendant actually said is irrelevant.

The passage suggests that the criterion used for deciding that most hearsay evidence is inadmissible is most likely

Reading Comprehension: 5

In order for our society to make decisions about the kinds of punishments we will impose on convicted criminals, we must understand why we punish criminals. Some people argue that retribution is the purpose of punishment and that, therefore, the punishment must in some direct way fit the crime. This view is based on the belief that a person who commits a crime deserves to be punished. Because the punishment must fit the specific crime, the theory of retribution allows a sentencing judge to consider the circumstances of each crime, criminal, and victim in imposing a sentence.

Another view, the deterrence theory, promotes punishment in order to discourage commission of future crimes. In this view, punishment need not relate directly to the crime committed, because the point is to deter both a specific criminal and the general public from committing crimes in the future. However, punishment must necessarily be uniform and consistently applied, in order for the members of the public to understand how they would be punished if they committed a crime. Laws setting sentencing guidelines are based on the deterrence theory and do not allow a judge to consider the specifics of a particular crime in sentencing a convicted criminal.

The retribution theory of punishment

Reading Comprehension: 5

In order for our society to make decisions about the kinds of punishments we will impose on convicted criminals, we must understand why we punish criminals. Some people argue that retribution is the purpose of punishment and that, therefore, the punishment must in some direct way fit the crime. This view is based on the belief that a person who commits a crime deserves to be punished. Because the punishment must fit the specific crime, the theory of retribution allows a sentencing judge to consider the circumstances of each crime, criminal, and victim in imposing a sentence.

Another view, the deterrence theory, promotes punishment in order to discourage commission of future crimes. In this view, punishment need not relate directly to the crime committed, because the point is to deter both a specific criminal and the general public from committing crimes in the future. However, punishment must necessarily be uniform and consistently applied, in order for the members of the public to understand how they would be punished if they committed a crime. Laws setting sentencing guidelines are based on the deterrence theory and do not allow a judge to consider the specifics of a particular crime in sentencing a convicted criminal.

The passage suggests that a person who believes that the death penalty results in fewer murders would most likely believe in

Reading Comprehension: 5

In order for our society to make decisions about the kinds of punishments we will impose on convicted criminals, we must understand why we punish criminals. Some people argue that retribution is the purpose of punishment and that, therefore, the punishment must in some direct way fit the crime. This view is based on the belief that a person who commits a crime deserves to be punished. Because the punishment must fit the specific crime, the theory of retribution allows a sentencing judge to consider the circumstances of each crime, criminal, and victim in imposing a sentence.

Another view, the deterrence theory, promotes punishment in order to discourage commission of future crimes. In this view, punishment need not relate directly to the crime committed, because the point is to deter both a specific criminal and the general public from committing crimes in the future. However, punishment must necessarily be uniform and consistently applied, in order for the members of the public to understand how they would be punished if they committed a crime. Laws setting sentencing guidelines are based on the deterrence theory and do not allow a judge to consider the specifics of a particular crime in sentencing a convicted criminal.

A good title for this passage would be

Reading Comprehension: 5

In order for our society to make decisions about the kinds of punishments we will impose on convicted criminals, we must understand why we punish criminals. Some people argue that retribution is the purpose of punishment and that, therefore, the punishment must in some direct way fit the crime. This view is based on the belief that a person who commits a crime deserves to be punished. Because the punishment must fit the specific crime, the theory of retribution allows a sentencing judge to consider the circumstances of each crime, criminal, and victim in imposing a sentence.

Another view, the deterrence theory, promotes punishment in order to discourage commission of future crimes. In this view, punishment need not relate directly to the crime committed, because the point is to deter both a specific criminal and the general public from committing crimes in the future. However, punishment must necessarily be uniform and consistently applied, in order for the members of the public to understand how they would be punished if they committed a crime. Laws setting sentencing guidelines are based on the deterrence theory and do not allow a judge to consider the specifics of a particular crime in sentencing a convicted criminal.

A person who believes in the deterrence theory would probably also support

Reading Comprehension: 5

In order for our society to make decisions about the kinds of punishments we will impose on convicted criminals, we must understand why we punish criminals. Some people argue that retribution is the purpose of punishment and that, therefore, the punishment must in some direct way fit the crime. This view is based on the belief that a person who commits a crime deserves to be punished. Because the punishment must fit the specific crime, the theory of retribution allows a sentencing judge to consider the circumstances of each crime, criminal, and victim in imposing a sentence.

Another view, the deterrence theory, promotes punishment in order to discourage commission of future crimes. In this view, punishment need not relate directly to the crime committed, because the point is to deter both a specific criminal and the general public from committing crimes in the future. However, punishment must necessarily be uniform and consistently applied, in order for the members of the public to understand how they would be punished if they committed a crime. Laws setting sentencing guidelines are based on the deterrence theory and do not allow a judge to consider the specifics of a particular crime in sentencing a convicted criminal.

The theories described in the passage differ in