Step 2 Flashcards
Memorize (25 cards)
When is a person guilty of common law murder? How is this different from first-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter?
A person is guilty of common law murder is the causing of death to another with malice aforethought. A person acts maliciously if they intended to kill the victim, intended to inflict great bodily injury, acted with extreme recklessness, or felony murder.
This is different from 1st degree murder because the mens rea differs, in first-degree murder, the defendant has specific intent to intentionally cause death of another.
This is different from involuntary manslaughter because involuntary manslaughter is criminal negligence (not acting maliciously) or a murder that was committed during a crime that was not a felony/inherently dangerous.
What are the requirements for proving self-defense and provocation? In what circumstances are these defenses unavailable to a defendant?
Self-defense a d must prove they had reasonable belief they were in imminent danger and used a proportional amount of force to protect themselves. Provocation is when a defendant was provoked in a way that caused them to lose self-control, leading to the offense. The defenses are unavailable if: (1) the d was the aggressor, the d escalated the conflict, or the d used excessive force beyond what was necessary for self-defense.
In what situations is mistake of fact a defense? Who has the burden of persuasion as it relates to this defense (prosecution or defense)?
In specific intent, malice, and general intent crimes. These defenses must be disproved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt.
What are the differences between larceny, larceny by trick, false pretenses, robbery, and embezzlement?
Larceny is taking someone’s property with intent to permanently steal it. False pretenses is lying to get both possession and title of property. Larceny by trick is deceiving someone to get possession but not title. Embezzlement is stealing property you already have lawful possession of. Robbery is larceny with force or threat of force.
When is a person guilty of conspiracy? How is conspiracy different than solicitation?
A person(s) are guilty of conspiracy when two or more people commit a crime with the specific intent to commit a crime. While person(s) are guilty of solicitation as soon as the question is asked whether or not the crime is committed.
When is a person guilty of being an accomplice? How can an accomplice “withdraw” from liability?
A person is guilty of being an accomplice if they aided or encouraged the principal in the commission of the crime.
An accomplice may withdraw if they can prove they only encouraged and then later discouraged the principal before the crime was committed, and if the accomplice did more than encourage they must prove they later made a substantial effort to prevent the crime from occurring.
What is the difference between an accomplice and an accessory after the fact?
An accomplice is someone who aids/encourages a principal to commit a crime while an accessory after the fact did not aid or encourage in the crime but knows the principal committed a felony and helps the person avoid being caught, tried, or punished for the felony.
When is a person guilty of attempt? What is legal impossibility? What is factual impossibility?
A person is guilty of attempt when their conduct becomes dangerously close to the completion of a crime.
Legal impossibility is when the d does something that was not illegal.
Factual impossibility means it was impossible for the defendant to commit the crime because of the circumstances beyond their control.
Explain the different tests for determining insanity. How is evaluating a defendant’s insanity defense different than determining defendant’s competency to stand trial?
M’naghten Test: Because of mental disease/defect D either (1) did not know his actions were wrong, or (2) did not understand the quality & nature of his act.
Irresistible Impulse: D was unable to control his actions because of a mental disease/defect
MPC Test: D lacked the mental capacity to either (1) appreciate the criminality of their conduct or (2) conform their conduct to the requirements of law.
When does double jeopardy apply?
Double jeopardy applies when a person is tried twice for the same offense after they’ve been acquitted or convicted.
What is the exclusionary rule and when does it apply? When does it not apply?
Makes both physical and testimonial evidence obtained in deliberate, reckless, or grossly negligent violation of the Fourth inadmissible against the person whose rights were violated. It does not apply if it was obtained during lawful means or if law enforcement acted in good faith under a valid warrant or law they believed to be correct.
What government actions are prohibited by the Fourth Amendment?
Prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.
Under the Fourth Amendment, when is a person considered “seized”, “arrested”, and “in custody”?
A person is seized when a reasonable person wouldn’t feel free to leave. An arrest is a full seizure with probable cause. A person in custody is when they are formally arrested/when their freedom is restrained.
What are the requirements for issuing and executing a valid search warrant?
Must be issued by a neutral magistrate (judge), based on probable cause, and must particularly describe the place to be searched and items seized.
What is the search incident to arrest exception to the warrant requirement, and what is the scope of search allowed under this exception?
Police can search a lawfully arrested person and the area within their immediate control without a warrant. This includes checking for weapons or evidence that might be destroyed.
When does the plain view exception to the warrant requirement apply?
If the officer is lawfully located in a place from which the object can be plainly seen. The officer must have a lawful right of access to the object itself. The incriminating character of the object must be immediately apparent.
What is the Terry Stop and Frisk exception to the warrant requirement, and what is the scope of search and questioning allowed under this exception?
Police can stop someone if they have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. If they suspect a person is armed, they can do a limited pat-down of outer clothing for weapons.
What are the Miranda warnings and when are they required to be given?
Miranda rights are the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, counsel, if you cannot afford one, one will be provided to you. They are required before any custodial interrogation.
How does a suspect invoke her right to an attorney under Miranda and what are the police obligated to do when this happens?
Suspect must clearly unambiguously ask for an attorney. Once this occurs, police must stop all questioning until their attorney is present.
How does a suspect invoke her right to remain silent under Miranda and what are the police obligated to do when this happens?
Suspect must clearly state they want to remain silent. Police must stop questioning, but may try again later after a break if they re-state the Miranda Rights.
When does a person have a right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment? Does a defendant have the right to choose counsel or represent herself?
The right attaches once formal charges are filed. A defendant can choose their own attorney or waive the right and represent themselves if the waiver is knowingly and voluntary.
What is a defendant’s remedy for a witness identification obtained through unnecessarily suggestive procedures?
Suppression of the identification if it was unnecessarily suggestive and created a substantial likelihood of misidentification.
In what situations does the ex post facto clause apply? When does it not apply?
Applies when the government retroactively makes an act criminal or increases punishment. It does not apply to procedural changes or civil laws.
What is the confrontation clause? Under what circumstances may the prosecution offer testimonial evidence against a defendant without violating the confrontation clause?
Gives the defendant the right to cross-examine witnesses. Testimonial statements can’t be used unless the witness is unavailable and the defendant had a prior chance to cross-examine.
