Criminal Law

Question 1

Common Law Arson

Answer 1

Common Law Arson: is the (1) malicious (2) burning of another’s home.

Question 2

Burglary - Specific Intent Crime

Answer 2

(1) breaking (by force or threat of force) and
(2) entering another’s home at
(3) night
(4) with the specific intent to commit a felony.

Question 3

Receiving Stolen goods

Answer 3

To be found guilty of receiving stolen goods, the defendant must have had knowledge that the goods at issue were stolen at the time she received the goods.
Defense: Honest, subjective belief that the goods were not stolen.

Question 4

Self-defense - Initial aggressor

Answer 4

An initial aggressor gains the right to act in self-defense where an aggressor using nondeadly force is met with deadly force or the aggressor, in good faith, completely withdraws from the altercation and communicates this fact to the victim.

Question 5

Battery

Answer 5

Battery is the:(i) Unlawful; (ii) touching; (iii) of another (iv) that causes harm;or (v) is offensive.

Michigan requires willful intent cause touching.

Question 6

Conspiracy - Specific Intent - Inchoate Crime

Answer 6

1. MPC /Federal: An agreement between two more persons to commit a crime, who all intend that the crime be committed.
2. Common law: An agreement between two more persons to commit a crime, who all intend that the crime be committed and do an overt act toward commission of it.
   - - MPC allows single conspiracy, (i.e. other parties never had intent to do crime, just feigned agreement) Common law does not.

– Wharton rule, if two or more people are required to commit a crime, can only charge them with conspiracy if there are more people than required participating in crime.

Question 7

Robbery

Answer 7

(1)Taking another’s property (2) from their person or presence (3) by force(4) with intent to permanently deprive.

Question 8

Felony Murder

Answer 8

Felony murder is an unintended killing proximately caused by and during the commission or attempted commission of an inherently dangerous felony, including a robbery. Most states apply the proximate cause theory when a bystander is killed by a police officer or due to resistance by the victim of an inherently dangerous felony.

Question 9

Common Law Murder

Answer 9

Unlawful Killing Of another with with malice aforethought. Malice means: (1) intent to kill, (2) inflict serious bodily harm, (3) depraved heart, or (4) Felony murder.

In Michigan, common-law murder is deemed second-degree murder

Question 10

Felony Murder - Michigan

Answer 10

Michigan Distinction: if murder committed during preparation, attempt, or commission of any of the following crimes: Burglary, Arson, Rape, Robbery, and Kidnapping.

PLUS - Criminal sexual conduct; Child abuse; Carjacking; Home Invasion; Extortion; Stalking; Torture; Vulnerable Adult Abuse; & Major controlled substance offense.

Question 11

Voluntary intoxication

Answer 11

Voluntary intoxication is a defense to specific-intent crimes if the intoxication prevents the formation of the required intent.

• Not a defense to crimes involving malice, recklessness, negligence, or strict-liability crimes.
• MI Dist.: Must be legally obtained substance and person must not know or have reason to know that it would cause intoxication.

Question 12

Involuntary intoxication

Answer 12

Involuntary intoxication is a defense to specific-intent, general intent, and malice crimes if Defendant does not know of the intoxicating nature of the substance, including substances taken pursuant to medical advice; or

Question 13

Legal Impossibility and Factual impossibility.

Answer 13

• Is a defense to attempt crimes.
• If person is doing something that they believe is illegal but it is not, then no attempt exist.
• valid defense because the actual act is Not illegal

Factual possibility is NOT a defense because had the facts been as defendant thought the act WOULD HAVE BEEN ILLEGAL.

Question 14

Voluntary Manslaughter

Answer 14

is murder committed in response to adequate provocation (i.e., in the “heat of passion”) with no reasonable cooling off period.

The defendant acts in the heat of passion if she was provoked by a situation that would inflame the passion of a reasonable person to the extent that it would cause that person to momentarily act out of passion rather than reason.

Question 15

Imperfect self-defense

Daughter is deathly afraid of 90 year old, wheel chair bound, crippled father. During an argument one day he threatens to kill her. Terrified because he never lies, she shoot and kills him. Jury believes she was in fear for he life, what will she be charged with?

Answer 15

Imperfect self-defense applies here. It is used when the person claiming self-defense unjustifiably kills the attacker, but cannot claim perfect-self defense for some reason. i.e. (an honest but unreasonable belief that use of deadly force was required). When used it mitigates murder down to voluntary manslaughter

Question 16

Attempt - Specific Intent Crime

Answer 16

An attempt requires:

i) Specific intent to commit the crime and,
ii) A substantial step toward completing the crime.

Defenses:
Legal impossibility - the act was not illegal.

If the crime is successfully completed, the attempt is merged into the completed crime.

Question 17

Assault

Answer 17

i) An attempt to commit a battery; (Specific Intent) or
ii) Intentionally placing another in apprehension of imminent bodily harm (General Intent).

Assault requires an absence of contact with the victim.

Question 18

Aggravated assault

Answer 18

ii) Intentionally placing another in apprehension of imminent bodily harm with a deadly weapon (General Intent).

Question 19

Assault - Michigan

Answer 19

In Michigan, assault is an attempt or threat, with unlawful force, to inflict bodily injury upon another, along with the present ability and intent.

Question 20

Kidnapping

Answer 20

Kidnapping is the:

i) Unlawful;

ii) Confinement of a person;
.
iii) Against that person’s will;

iv) Coupled with either:
a) The movement; or
b) The hiding of that person.

Question 21

Kidnapping - Michigan

Answer 21

Occurs when a person knowingly restrains another person with the intent to do one or more of the following:

i) Hold the person for ransom or reward;
ii) Use the person as a human shield or hostage;
iii) Sexually assault the person;
iv) Take the person outside of the state; or
v) Hold that person in involuntary servitude.

The restraint may be related to the commission of other crimes and does not have to exist for any prescribed length of time

Question 22

False Imprisonment

Answer 22

False imprisonment is the:

i) Unlawful;
ii) Confinement of a person;
iii) Without consent.

Question 23

Rape

Answer 23

Rape is:

i) Unlawful;
ii) Sexual intercourse;
iii) With a female;
iv) Against her will by force or threat of immediate force.

Question 24

Malice

Answer 24

Acting with a reckless disregard of a high risk of harm occurring.

Question 25

Specific intent crimes

Answer 25

Specific intent crimes require that the defendant possess a subjective desire, specific objective, or knowledge to accomplish a prohibited result. The specific intent crimes include: i) First-degree murder; ii) Inchoate offenses (attempt, solicitation, conspiracy); iii) Assault with intent to commit a battery; and iv) Theft offenses (larceny, larceny by trick, false pretenses, embezzlement, forgery, burglary, robbery).

Question 26

General Intent Crimes

Answer 26

Acts that are done knowingly, recklessly, or negligently under the model penal code are general intent crimes. MBE likes to test forms of homicide, battery and rape.

Question 27

Exam Tip - Mens Rea

Answer 27

If MBE question contains a statute look for the following language for tips. "intent to" = Specific Intent crime "Knowingly or Recklessly" = General Intent No mens rea language = consider strict liability

Question 28

Merger

Answer 28

A defendant can be convicted of more than one crime arising out of the same act, but not two crimes when they merge into one. Two types of merger: (1) lesser included offenses and (2) inchoate and completed offense

Question 29

Merger - Inchoate crimes

Answer 29

Attempt and Solicitation merge into the completed offenses. Ex: murder during failed robbery attempt. No attempted robbery charge, because it merges into felony murder. Conspiracy does NOT merger with substantive crime CAN be convicted of both.

Question 30

Accomplice Aiding & Abetting

Answer 30

Any person who knowingly aids in the commission of a crime directly or indirectly can be punished as directly committing the crime. Elements 1) Crime charged completed by D or some other person 2) D assisted or encouraged the commision of the crime 3) D intended for crime to occur or had knowldge of crime at the time D gave assistance or encouragement. Note: mere presence with or w/o knowledge that crime will occur is insufficent. Person must do some act.

Question 31

Mistake of law

Answer 31

Generally, ignorance of law is no excuse / defense to crime. But there are 3 exceptions. 1. Interpretation of law 2. lack of notice 3. mistake of law - specific intent crimes.

Question 32

Conspiracy-MI

Answer 32

1) An agreement expressed or implied between two or more people; 2) to commit an illegal act or 3) commit a legal act in an illegal manner 4) with the intent to accomplish or help that purpose. Liablity: Each conspirator is laible for each others crimes that are foreseeable and committed in furthance of the conspiarcy.

Question 33

Conspiracy-Withdrawal

Answer 33

At common law, withdrawal was not a defense to conspiracy because the conspiracy is complete as soon as the parties enter into the agreement. Under the federal rule, which is also the majority rule, a conspiracy does not come into existence until an overt act has been committed. Thus, communicating withdrawal or alerting cops before an overt act has been committed, may avoid criminal liability.

Question 34

Essay example of Rule for Larceny and Conspiracy

Answer 34

Larceny is the trespassory taking and carrying away of the personal property of another with the intent to permanently deprive that person of the property. An accomplice is a person who, with intent that the crime be committed, aids or abets a principal prior to or during the commission of the crime and is present at the commission of the offense. The accomplice’s assistance to the principal may be verbal encouragement, financial assistance, or physical assistance, provided that the accomplice has the requisite intent to encourage or assist in the commission of the crime. An accomplice is responsible for the crime to the same extent as the principal.

Question 35

Insanity Defense - M’Naghten test

Answer 35

Under the M’Naghten test, the defendant is not guilty if, because of a defect of reason due to a mental disease, the defendant did not know either (i) the nature and quality of the act or (ii) the wrongfulness of the act.

Question 36

Insanity Defense - Irresistible-impulse test

Answer 36

Under the irresistible-impulse test, the defendant is not guilty if he lacked the capacity for self-control and free choice because mental disease or defect prevented him from being able to conform his conduct to the law. The loss of control need not be sudden. This is an impulse that the defendant cannot resist.

Question 37

Insanity Defense - Durham rule

Answer 37

Under the Durham rule, a defendant is not guilty if the unlawful act was the product of the defendant’s mental disease or defect and would not have been committed but for the disease or defect. This is the “but-for” test.

Question 38

Insanity Defense - Model Penal Code test

Answer 38

The Model Penal Code combines the M’Naghten and irresistible-impulse tests. The defendant is not guilty if, at the time of the conduct, he, as a result of a mental disease or defect, did not have substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of the act or to conform his conduct to the law. MPC § 4.01.

Question 39

Embezzlement

Answer 39

Embezzlement is the fraudulent conversion of the property of another by one who is already in lawful possession of the property.

Question 40

Larceny By trick

Answer 40

Defendant makes a misrepresentation to the Plaintiff causing him to give up possession of his property.

Question 41

2nd Degree Murder - Michigan

Answer 41

(1) a death (2) caused by an act of the defendant, (3) with malice and (4) without justification. Malice is any of the following: (1) intent to kill or (2) intent to do great bodily harm, or (3) intent to do an act in wanton and wilful disregard of human life

Question 42

Voluntary Intoxication

Answer 42

Voluntary Intoxication Is a defense to Specific Intent crimes only. Meaning must drive a FIAT i) First-degree murder; ii) Inchoate offenses (attempt, solicitation, conspiracy); iii) Assault with intent to commit a battery; and iv) Theft offenses (larceny, larceny by trick, false pretenses, embezzlement, forgery, burglary, robbery).

Question 43

Felonious Assault

Answer 43

Is (1) simple assault, (2) aggravated by the use of a weapon, (3) with present or apparent ability to carry it out.

Question 44

Larceny from the Person

Answer 44

Larceny elements: (1) trespassory taking of another's property (2) from person or person's immediate area (3) some movement of property (3) Intent to permantly deprive at time of taking property.

Question 45

Larceny by Trick

Answer 45

Larceny by Trick elements: (1) D lies to gain possession of P's property (2) some movement of property (3) Intent to permantly deprive at time of taking property.

Question 46

Larcney by Embezzlement

Answer 46

Embezzlement elements: (1) D is in proper POSSESSION of P's property (2) but converts property to own use (3) Intent to permantly deprive at time of taking property

Question 47

Larcney by False Pretenses

Answer 47

False Pretenses elements: (1) D lies to gain TITLE to another's property (2) some movement of property (3) Intent to permantly deprive at time of taking property.

Question 48

Solicitation

Answer 48

Is the inciting, urging, counseling, or commanding another to commit a crime with intent that the person solicited actually commit the crime. A person who solicits remains guilty of solicitation but avoids accomplice liability.