CRIMINAL

Question 1

SOLICITATION

Answer 1

encouraging another to commit a criminal offense with the intent that the offense be committed.

Question 2

INCOHATE CRIMES

Answer 2

are not a crime, they are a precrime which include Solicitation, Attempt and Conspiracy.

Question 3

ATTEMPT

Answer 3

a direct but ineffectual act towards the completion of a criminal offense with the specific intent to commit the crime.

Question 4

ATTEMPTED BATTERY

Answer 4

A direct but ineffectual act towards the completion of the crime of battery with the specific intent to commit battery.

Question 5

COMPOUNDING A FELONY

Answer 5

Taking money, property, gratuity, reward or promise thereof, while agreeing to conceal a crime or abstain from prosecuting a crime with knowledge that a crime has been committed.

Question 6

BRIBERY

Answer 6

Giving, offering, promising to anyone about to be called as a witness, (or a government official), consideration with any understanding or agreement that the testimony of the witness shall be influenced by the consideration.

Question 7

CONSPIRACY

Answer 7

an agreement between two or more parties to commit the criminal offense of (insert crime) and an overt act towards the completion of that offense.

Question 8

ACCOMPLICE LIABILITY

Answer 8

To be liable under the theory of Accomplice Liability, one must aid and abet the principal of a crime, through promoting, encouraging or facilitating another to commit a crime. An accomplice is liable for another’s actions that are the natural and probable consequence of the crime.

Question 9

VICARIOUS LIABILITY

Answer 9

Three Theories: Conspiracy Liability, Accessory Liability and Third Party Vicarious Liability

Question 10

CONSPIRACY LIABILITY

Answer 10

attaches to two or more persons who agree to commit a crime and one or more commits and overt act in furtherance of that agreement.

Question 11

PINKERTON’S RULE

Answer 11

provides criminal liability to a party to a conspiracy for all reasonably foreseeable crimes committed by any co-conspirator during the conspiracy.

Question 12

ACCESSORY LIABILITY

Answer 12

attaches to all persons who commit a crime, promote, encourage and facilitate the commission of that crime where there are natural and probable consequences.

Question 13

PRINCIPALS

Answer 13

A principal is one who commits the crime

Question 14

ACCESSORIES

Answer 14

an accessory is one who promotes, encourages and facilitates the commission of that crime.

Question 15

PERPETRATORS, AIDERS AND ABETTORS

Answer 15

A perpetrator is one who commits the crime and an aider and abettor is one who promotes, encourages, and facilitates the commission of that crime.

Question 16

ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT

Answer 16

is a crime when one who knows that a crime has been committed, aids, and assists one in escaping capture or prosecution for that crime.

Question 17

ACCESSORY BEFORE THE FACT

Answer 17

is a person who aids, abets, or encourages another to commit a crime but who is not present at the scene of the crime.

Question 18

THIRD PARTY VICARIOUS LIABILITY

Answer 18

asks whether a co-felon is liable for the acts of a third party who acts with justification or excuse.

Question 19

REDLINE RULE

Answer 19

When the death of a co-felon results from the justifiable act of a third party, the surviving co-felon is not criminally liable for the killing

Question 20

MINORITY RULE

Answer 20

When the death of a co-felon results from the justifiable act of a third party, the surviving co-felon can be held criminally liable for the death which is a direct and foreseeable consequence of the actions of those committing the felony

Question 21

IRELAND RULE

Answer 21

assaultive behavior cannot be the basis for felony murder. The felony for the purposes of the felony murder is not a felony that could directly result in death (for instance, burglary.) Otherwise, prosecution would never have to prove malice aforethought.

Question 22

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Answer 22

is any defense that assumes the complaint or charges to be correct but raises other facts that, if true, would establish a valid excuse or justification or a right to engage in the conduct in question.

Question 23

ELEMENTAL DEFENSE

Answer 23

a defense to a crime that is missing one of the elements of the crime. (States that the prosecutor failed to prove an element of the crime)

Question 24

INTOXICATION

Answer 24

is defined as consuming sufficient alcohol or a mind-altering drug such that the defendant is unable to form the requisite intent to commit the crime. (Elemental defense)

Question 25

VOLUNTARY INTOXICATION

Answer 25

is defined as the intentional consumption of the alcohol or mind-altering drug. (Defense to specific intent crimes as to unable to form the intent (mens rea) to commit the crime)

Question 26

INVOLUNTARY INTOXICATION

Answer 26

is defined as the unintentional consumption of the alcohol or mind-altering drug.

Question 27

ALIBI DEFENSE

Answer 27

is defined as facts placing the defendant at the relevant time in a different place so as to render it impossible for the defendant to be the guilty party.

Question 28

IDENTITY DEFENSE

Answer 28

is defined as facts identifying the defendant as the incorrect defendant who committed the crime so as to render it impossible for the defendant to be the guilty party.

Question 29

SELF-DEFENSE

Answer 29

is defined as a justification for conduct that would otherwise be criminal when the defendant is threatened with the use, or threat of the imminent use, of unlawful force that does or could cause physical injury and which a reasonable person would believe could not be avoided without the use of physical force, and the actor defends by using only a reasonable amount of force and was not responsible for the situation that prompted the need to use such force.

Question 30

DEFENSE OF OTHERS

Answer 30

is defined as a person is justified in using force to protect a third party from unlawful force by an aggressor.

Question 31

THREATENING OR INTERFERING WITH A PEACE OFFICER

Answer 31

is defined as willfully resisting delaying, or obstructing a peace officer in the performance of their duty.

Question 32

DURESS

Answer 32

Duress is defined as a defense which excuses criminal conduct where the defendant was under an unlawful threat of imminent death or serious bodily injury, which threat cause the actor to engage in conduct violating the literal terms of the criminal law. ***(Elemental Defense because intent cannot be proven) Can be both, Affirmative and Elemental, may be easier

Question 33

NECESSITY

Answer 33

is an affirmative defense where a defendant is justified in committing crimes necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury that is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no conduct of the defendant. a. I did everything I was charged with, but [justification.] Then, there needs to be an offer of proof so that the defense can be instructed to the jury b. Economic Necessity. Economic necessity alone cannot support a choice of crime.

Question 34

BATTERED PERSON SYNDROME

Answer 34

psychological social response that occur between people in a history of context of being beaten. To avoid an assault May be viable as a form of Self-Defense has an imminent threat. That is developed over time by the beatings.

Question 35

USE OF FORCE FOR AN ARREST

Answer 35

Use of force upon another person is justifiable when the actor is making an arrest and the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary to effect a lawful arrest.

Question 36

CITIZEN’S ARREST

Answer 36

An arrest, made without a warrant and by a person who is not a law enforcement official, of another, for a crime that has occurred in his presence.

Question 36

IRRESISTIBLE IMPULSE

Answer 36

Irresistible Impulse defines a test for insanity. It must be clearly proven that, at the time of the committing of the act, the defendant knew the action was wrong, but who, as a result of a disease of the mind, was unable to exercise control over their actions.

Question 37

DEFENSE OF PROPERTY

Answer 37

One may use as much force as reasonably possible. Excessive force is not permitted.

Question 38

ENTRAPMENT

Answer 38

is a defense to a criminal charge when the defendant asserts they committed the crime because a government agent induced, encouraged, and incited the commission of the crime. **a. Subjective (predisposed) defines entrapment regarding a defendant who was predisposed to commit the crime even though police conduct may have provided the opportunity (majority rule) b. Objective entrapment (outrageous conduct) regarding a defendant who committed a crime as a result of outrageous police conduct in the inducement. (minority rule)

Question 39

INSANITY

Answer 39

is a kind of defense which calls into question the defendant's ability to form the requisite mental state of the crime. **May be Elemental or Affirmative Defense**

Question 40

AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE (ALI)

Answer 40

ALI defines a test for insanity. A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect, they lack substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of the conduct or to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law.

Question 41

M'NAGHTEN'S RULE

Answer 41

M'NAGHTEN'S RULE defines a test for insanity. It must be clearly proven that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act they were doing; or, if they did know it, that they did not know they were doing what was wrong.

Question 42

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

Answer 42

a. Direct disobedience is protesting a law by breaking that law. b. Indirect disobedience is violating a law or interfering with a government policy that is not, itself, the object of protest.

Question 43

DURHAM RULE

Answer 43

It must be clearly proven that, at the time of the committing of the act, a defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect.

Question 44

7. Burden of Proof: Elemental vs. Affirmative Defenses

Answer 44

a. If a defense is aimed at an element of the crime, the defendant does not have to prove it, the onus is on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the element. b. However, with an affirmative defense, public policy states that if you’d like to come to court with a justification for your crime without attacking the elements of the crime, inserting new evidence regarding the justification, the defendant has the burden to offer proof of an emergency by preponderance of evidence. This is not about whether the prosecution has enough proof to each element

Question 45

KIDNAPPING

Answer 45

The unlawful movement of a person using force or fear from one place to another. In order to be considered kidnapping, the movement need be without the consent of the person and the movement is for a substantial distance.

Question 46

MAYHEM

Answer 46

An unlawful act by means of physical force resulting in a disfiguring injury done with malice.

Question 47

PERJURY

Answer 47

Making a willful statement, under oath, of any material matter which the witness knows to be false.

Question 48

BIGAMY

Answer 48

Marrying any other person while having a husband or wife living.

Question 49

ARSON

Answer 49

Willfully and maliciously setting fire to any structure and land of another. Arson can also be defined as willfully and maliciously setting fire to one's own property if for the purpose of insurance fraud.

Question 50

ASSAULT

Answer 50

Unlawful placing of another in the reasonable apprehension of an immediate impending battery.

Question 51

BATTERY

Answer 51

Unlawful harmful or offensive touching of another without consent or privilege

Question 52

LARCENY

Answer 52

The taking and carrying away the personal property of another, without their consent, with the intent to permanently deprive.

Question 53

LARCENY BY TRICK

Answer 53

The taking and carrying away the personal property of another by the use of false promises with the intent to permanently deprive.

Question 54

BURGLARY (COMMON LAW AND MODERN)

Answer 54

Under common law, burglary is defined as the breaking and entering the dwelling house of another at nighttime with the intent to commit a felony therein. Modernly, burglary is defined as the entering the protected structure of another with the intent to commit a theft or felony therein.

Question 55

ROBBERY

Answer 55

is the taking and carrying away the personal property of another by force or fear from their immediate presence with the intent to permanently deprive.

Question 56

EMBEZZLEMENT

Answer 56

The converting of the property of another who has entrusted that property to the person, with the intent to permanently deprive.

Question 57

EXTORTION

Answer 57

Obtaining property of another by wrongful use of force or threat of force or under color of authority with the intent to permanently deprive.

Question 58

FALSE PRETENSES

Answer 58

The fraudulent appropriation of title to another's property.

Question 59

FORGERY

Answer 59

The fraudulent creating or altering of a document or object with the intent to defraud or deceive.

Question 60

HOMICIDE

Answer 60

The killing of a human being by another.

Question 61

MISAPPROPRIATION OF FOUND PROPERTY

Answer 61

is the crime that occurs when a person retains found property and makes no reasonable or just efforts to find the owner.

Question 62

RAPE

Answer 62

defined as sexual intercourse with another against the other person's will or by force or fear and without that person's consent.

Question 63

RECEIPT OF STOLEN PROPERTY

Answer 63

is defined as obtaining property known to be stolen with the intent to permanently deprive from the legal owner.

Question 64

Murder

Answer 64

is defined as them intentional or unlawful killing of another with Malice Aforethought

Question 65

Malice Aforethought

Answer 65

Mens Rea of Murder may be Express or Implied

Question 66

Express Malice

Answer 66

Intent to kill

Question 67

Implied Malice

Answer 67

Intent to cause great bodily harm or behavior that is inherently dangerous to human life, or by killing during the commission of a felony

Question 68

First Degree Murder

Answer 68

is defined as the intentional or unlawful killing of another with MALICE AFORETHOUGHT with PREMEDITATION and DELIBERATION.

Question 69

PREMEDITATION

Answer 69

planning and preparation to kill.

Question 70

DELIBERATION

Answer 70

killer took the time to reflect before killing.

Question 71

SECOND DEGREE MURDER

Answer 71

is defined as the intentional or unlawful killing of another with MALICE AFORETHOUGHT. Alternatively, second degree murder is understood as all murders that are not first degree.

Question 72

FELONY MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE

Answer 72

is defined as a death that occurs during the intentional commission of an enumerated felony that is inherently dangerous

Question 73

ENUMERATED FELONIES

Answer 73

Burglary, Robbery, Rape, Kidnapping

Question 74

CAUSATION

Answer 74

To support felony murder, a defendant’s actions must be the actual and proximate cause of cause of the death the occurs during a felony. Actual cause is found when by the defendant’s act, the death would not have occurred. Proximate cause is found when the death was a foreseeable result of the felony.

Question 75

FELONY MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE

Answer 75

is defined as murder committed during the intentional commission of a felony not otherwise enumerated.

Question 76

MANSLAUGHTER

Answer 76

is defined as the intentional or unlawful killing of another without MALICE AFORETHOUGHT.

Question 77

VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER

Answer 77

is defined as the intentional or unlawful killing of another without MALICE AFORETHOUGHT during SUDDEN QUARREL or HEAT OF PASSION or during the use of IMPERFECT SELF-DEFENSE.

Question 78

SUDDEN QUARREL

Answer 78

means a legally recognized and sufficient provocation causing a reasonable person to lose normal self-control.

Question 79

HEAT OF PASSION

Answer 79

exists when a defendant is provoked, a reasonable person would have been so provoked, a reasonable person would not have had time to cool off and the defendant did not have time to cool off.

Question 80

PROVOCATION

Answer 80

must be provoked

Question 81

MERE WORDS/INFORMATIONAL WORDS

Answer 81

cannot be adequate provocation.

Question 82

IMPERFECT SELF-DEFENSE

Answer 82

is unreasonably but honestly using deadly force to protect oneself

Question 83

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER

Answer 83

is defined as the unintentional killing of another without MALICE AFORETHOUGHT. It can occur during an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, when committed without due caution and circumspection and when the act constitutes criminal negligence

Question 84

* CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE

Answer 84

when the defendant simultaneously understands and disregards a substantial risk of harm.

Question 85

MISDEMEANOR MANSLAUGHTER

Answer 85

is defined as the killing of another that occurs during the commission of a misdemeanor or an infraction