Criminal Law

Question 1

An individual is criminally liable as an accomplice if:

Answer 1

he gives assistance or encouragement, or fails to act where he has a legal duty to oppose the crime of another, and purposefully intends to effectuate commission of the crime.

Question 2

A defendant is responsible for the criminal acts of another whom he aided, abetted, or facilitated, provided the criminal consequences are:

Answer 2

reasonably foreseeable in terms of the acts the defendant intended to aid or abet.

Question 3

Define Arson.

Answer 3

At common law, the crime of arson consists of –
the malicious burning of the dwelling of another.

Burning requirement–
Mere blackening of the surface is not enough, there must be some physical damage by fire (not smoke or heat) of the premises itself.

Additionally, mere burning of the furniture or other contents of the dwelling without fire damage to the structure itself is not arson.

Question 4

Define Burglary.

Answer 4

Burglary consists of the breaking and entering of the dwelling house of another in the nighttime with the intent to commit a felony within.

Entry is achieved by placing any portion of the body or any instrument inside the structure.

Breaking and entering must both be done without the occupant’s consent and only some force to create an opening

Defendant must have necessary intent at the time of entry and need not carry out the intent to be guilty.

Modern statutes often expand places covered, eliminate need for breaking, eliminate nighttime requirement and expand intent.

Question 5

Define the majority rule for Defense of a Third Person.

Answer 5

The majority rule focuses on the reasonableness of the defendant’s belief that the third party was being unlawfully attacked. If the third person is also the aggressor or a felon resisting lawful arrest, and the defendant reasonably but mistakenly uses lethal force against the victim to protect that third party, the defendant may nonetheless claim the justification of defense of others.

Question 6

Reasonable non-deadly force is justified in defending one’s property from theft, destruction, or trespass where:

Answer 6

the defendant has a reasonable belief that the property is in immediate danger and no greater force than necessary is used.

Question 7

Define the defense of Duress.

Answer 7

The defense of duress excuses criminal conduct where the defendant reasonably believes that the only way to avoid unlawful threats of great bodily harm or imminent death to himself or a third party is to engage in unlawful conduct.

*Not a defense to a crime consisting of an intentional killing

Question 8

Define Embezzlement.

Answer 8

The fraudulent conversion or misappropriation of the property of another by one who is already in lawful possession with intent to defraud.

Question 9

Embezzlement involves misappropriation by a defendant who has:

Answer 9

lawful possession (extensive and discretionary).

Question 10

Defense of Entrapment (Majority Rule).

Answer 10

Entrapment exists where the criminal act is the product of creative activity originating from law enforcement officials, and the defendant is in no way predisposed to commit the crime.

Question 11

Defense of Entrapment (Minority Rule).

Answer 11

Entrapment occurs if police activity would cause a reasonable and unpredisposed person to form the intent to commit the crime.

Question 12

M’Naghten Rule: Defendant is entitled to acquittal only if the facts show that at the time of the crime:

Answer 12

he had a serious mental disease or defect;
this caused a defect in his reasoning abilities; and as a result he did not either:
— understand the nature of the act he was doing; or
— understand that his act was wrong

Question 13

Intent to kill, malice, or intent to inflict serious bodily injury, must be proved by examination of:

Answer 13

all the surrounding circumstances, including the words and behavior of the defendant.

Question 14

Intoxication is involuntary if either:

Answer 14

defendant did not know substance was intoxicating; or defendant consumed substance under duress.

Note: apply insanity test

Question 15

Elements of Kidnapping.

Answer 15

Either:
—Confining or restraining a person; or
—Moving (asporting) a person; and
Without authority of law.

Question 16

Define Larceny.

Answer 16

Larceny was defined as:

• – trespassory taking (exercise of control adverse to owner);
• – asportation (some movement);
• – corporal personal property of another;
• – from the possession of another;
• – wrongfully - either:
  a) without permission; or
  b) with permission; or obtained by deception (larceny by trick) and;
• – with intent to permanently (at the time of the taking).

Question 17

Larceny notes:

Answer 17

The intent to keep, destroy, or hold property for ransom will suffice to prove intent to permanently deprive (permanent loss).

If, at the time of taking, the defendant intends to return the property to the victim unconditionally and within a reasonable time, there is no intent to permanently deprive.

Title does not control for larceny.

Question 18

Forming the intent after the taking and during the possession is sufficient only if (for larceny):

Answer 18

• – the original taking was wrongful
  1. ) without consent; or
  2. ) with consent obtained by deception

Question 19

A private citizen is privileged to use that amount of non-deadly force that reasonably appears necessary to:

Answer 19

prevent the commission of a felony or a misdemeanor amounting to a breach of the peace.

Question 20

A private citizen may use the same amount of deadly force as a police officer only if:

Answer 20

a dangerous felony is involved and the person against whom he used the force is actually guilty of the crime.

Question 21

Define Obtaining Property by False Pretenses.

Answer 21

Obtaining property by false pretenses consists of a false representation of a present or past material fact by the defendant, which causes the victim to pass title to his property to the defendant who knows his representation to be false.

The defendant must know that his representation is false at the time the victim transfers title to him, and intends thereby to defraud the victim.

Must convey title.

Question 22

Define Rape.

Answer 22

Rape is the act of unlawful sexual intercourse by a male person with a female person not his spouse without the woman’s effective consent and by force.

Fraud will render woman’s consent ineffective only if the fraud goes to the nature of the act

Note that intercourse accomplished by mere threats rather than force may also constitute rape.

Question 23

If the victim is incapable of consenting, the intercourse is rape. Inability to consent may be caused by:

Answer 23

the effect of drugs or intoxicating substances or by unconsciousness.

Question 24

Define Receiving Stolen Property.

Answer 24

The receiving (taking possession) of stolen property known to be stolen with the intent to permanently deprive the owner.

Question 25

For receiving stolen property the defendant must either know or actually believe that:

Answer 25

the property is stolen. An honest but unreasonable belief that the property is not stolen would likely prevent a conviction for receiving stolen property.

Question 26

Define Robbery.

Answer 26

Robbery is defined as larceny in which
— the taking of the property must be from the person or presence of the victim and the taking must be accomplished by force, intimidation, threat, or violence.

Fear and intimidation based on lies qualify as threats of robbery. The use of force must be contemporaneous with the taking (in other words, all part of one occurrence).

Question 27

If a person has a reasonable belief that he is in imminent danger of unlawful bodily harm, he may use that amount of force in self defense that is:

Answer 27

reasonably necessary to prevent such harm, unless he is the initial aggressor.

Question 28

An aggressor is one who strikes the first blow or commits a crime against the victim. The aggressor can regain the right of self-defense in either of two ways:

Answer 28

upon complete withdrawal perceived by the other party; or

escalation of force by the victim of the initial aggression.

Question 29

Proximate causation exists if:

Answer 29

the voctoms death ntuarral

Question 30

When the defendant’s actions alone cause the harm, the defendant’s act is:

Answer 30

the direct cause. It is very likely that the defendant will be held legally responsible.

Question 31

To relieve the defendant of liability and thus, in effect, break the chain of proximate cause, the other force must be:

Answer 31

a superseding intervening cause.

Question 32

A superseding factor must be:

Answer 32

independent of the defendant’s actions;
unforeseeable; and
the sole immediate cause of the victim’s death.

Question 33

Define the crime of Attempt.

Answer 33

To commit a criminal attempt, a person must:

• – do something constituting a substantial step towards commission of the crime;
• – with intent to commit the crime

Question 34

For attempt, a two-part intent must be proved:

Answer 34

intent to complete the conduct constituting the attempted crime; and any intent necessary for the attempted crime

Question 35

Legal impossibility is traditionally regarded as a defense to attempt and involves the situation where:

Answer 35

the defendant did all those things he intended to do, but his acts did not constitute a crime.

Question 36

Murder is defined as:

Answer 36

a killing with “malice aforethought” if the defendant acted with:
intent to kill; or
intent to cause serious bodily injury; or
awareness of extremely high risk that death will result; or intent to commit felony (felony murder).

Question 37

The actus reus may be any of the three following:

Answer 37

• – a voluntary act,
• – an involuntary act arising from a voluntary act (such as an epileptic driving a car), or
• – an omission to act where there is a legal duty to act.

Question 38

For murder, the act must cause the death of another living person both:

Answer 38

actually and proximately.

Question 39

In some jurisdictions, to persuade or aid another to commit suicide is:

Answer 39

a sufficient basis for murder.

Question 40

If an intervening cause kills the victim before the defendant can complete his act, he will be:

Answer 40

acquitted of homicide.

Question 41

In omission situations, people who fail to prevent injury or death are generally not criminally liable for the victim’s condition, unless:

Answer 41

they have a duty to act; and
the defendant as aware of the facts giving rise to the duty to act; and
performing the duty was possible.

Question 42

Define mens reas or intent.

Answer 42

• Purpose: a conscious desire
• Knowledge: awareness of a practical certainty
• Recklessness: awareness of a substantial risk
• Negligence: reasonable person would have been aware of a substantial risk

Question 43

Define Conspiracy.

Answer 43

The crime of conspiracy is the unlawful entering into a agreement to commit a crime ; and
with the specific intent to commit an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means.

Question 44

Co-conspirator Rule: All members of a criminal conspiracy are guilty of crimes committed by other members of that conspiracy if those crimes are both:

Answer 44

— committed in the furtherance of the scheme; and

a foreseeable result of the scheme.

Question 45

Withdrawal is no defense for:

Answer 45

the crime of conspiracy and is only a defense to a crime which the defendant is liable under the co-conspirator rule.

Question 46

For a withdrawal to be effective, it must be:

Answer 46

— timely notice and fully communicated to all other members of the conspiracy; and
performs an affirmative act to “thwart” the success of the conspiracy (or for other members to abandon).

Question 47

Define Felony-Murder.

Answer 47

Felony-murder is an unintentional killing proximately caused during the commission or attempted commission of a serious or inherently dangerous felony.

Question 48

Accidental deaths during the commission of a felony:

Answer 48

are murder.

Question 49

A death during a felony may be:

Answer 49

must have been foreseeable; or

to have been dangerous as committed.

Question 50

All co-felons are guilty of felony murder if:

Answer 50

the death was foreseeable to them.

Question 51

Define Involuntary Manslaughter.

Answer 51

Involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional killing resulting:
— in the course of committing a misdemeanor; or
with criminal negligence.

Question 52

Define Criminal Negligence.

Answer 52

Criminal negligence requires that the defendant’s conduct creates a high degree of risk of death or serious injury beyond the tort standard of ordinary negligence.

Question 53

Define First-Degree Murder:

Answer 53

First-degree murder includes intent-to-kill murder committed with premeditation and deliberation, felony-murder, and in some jurisdictions, murder accomplished by lying in wait, poison, terrorism, or torture.

Question 54

Define Second-Degree Murder:

Answer 54

Second-degree murder is any murder that does not meet the requisite elements of first-degree murder, for example, where the defendant’s mens rea is intent to inflict serious bodily injury;

Question 55

Define Solicitation.

Answer 55

Solicitation consists of:

• – Enticing, advising, inciting, inducing, urging, or otherwise encouraging another to commit a felony or misdemeanor;
• – With intent that the person commit that offense

One who solicits another to commit a crime cannot be convicted of both the solicitation and the completed offense.

Question 56

Define Voluntary Manslaughter.

Answer 56

Voluntary manslaughter is an intentional killing mitigated by objectively reasonable provocation;
that actually caused the defendant to kill the victim; and defendant acted before an objectively sufficient cooling period elapsed.

Question 57

Adequate provocation, measured objectively, must be such that:

Answer 57

a reasonable person would lose self-control.

Question 58

Imperfect self-defense may mitigate murder to voluntary manslaughter where a defendant was either:

Answer 58

at fault in starting an altercation, or unreasonably, but honestly, believed that harm was imminent or that deadly force was necessary.

Question 59

Intent to return or replace converted property:

Answer 59

does not show the lack of the intent to defraud required for embezzlement.

Question 60

Under false pretenses an insufficient misrepresentation means:

Answer 60

• – unkept promise; or

- – misrepresentation of a future fact

Question 61

An affirmative misrepresentation is required but:

Answer 61

failure to correct a misunderstanding is sufficient of the defendant creates the misunderstanding.

Question 62

Where the victim of a crime such as robbery or rape is confined or moved during the crime:

Answer 62

kidnapping does not occur unless the confinement or movement is not merely incidental but increases the risk to the victim; or
makes successful completion of the crime more likely.

Question 63

Possession by actual physical control must involve:

Answer 63

more than momentary control.

Question 64

Constructive possession requires:

Answer 64

the ability to exercise actual physical control;
with awareness of that ability;
for a period sufficient to enable the person to terminate the possession

Question 65

A participant in an offense is not guilty of the offense if either:

Answer 65

the participant is a member of the class of persons protected  by the crime (ex. statutory rape); or
the crime inherently involves several types of participants and only some are made liable.

Question 66

Factual impossibility is not a defense to an attempt and exists:

Answer 66

when a person’s intended end constitutes a crime, but she fails to consummate the offense because of an attendant circumstance unknown to her or beyond her control

Question 67

Ignorance or mistake concerning a matter of fact will affect criminal liability only if:

Answer 67

it shows defendant lacked the intent required for the crime; and the mistake was objectively reasonable.

Question 68

Specific intent crimes:

Answer 68

are any offense defined as doing something “with the intent to…”

Question 69

Ignorance or mistake concerning a matter of law is a defense if:

Answer 69

that belief was objectively reasonable; and
the defendant relied upon a statute later held invalid;
a judicial decision later overruled; or
an official interpretation of the law by a public official.

Question 70

M’Naghten Approach.

Answer 70

1) Assume the situation was as the defendant perceived it
2) Ask under those circumstances, would he have been legally entitled to do what he did?

If so, but only if so, he is entitled to acquittal.

Question 71

Under voluntary intoxication a defendant should be acquitted if the crime requires:

Answer 71

proof of specific intent and the intoxication shows he lacked the intent.

Note: There is no voluntary intoxication defense if recklessness is sufficient for liability.

Question 72

Criminal assault is either:

Answer 72

(i) an attempt to commit a battery OR (ii) the intentional creation - other than mere words - of a reasonable apprehension in the mind of imminent bodily harm