Crim Law - AMP Flashcards
At common law, murder was _______, which is established by_______.
the killing of a human being with malice aforethought. The mental state of malice aforethought could be established with any one of the following states of mind: (i) intent to kill; (ii) intent to cause serious bodily harm; (iii) reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (“depraved heart”); or (iv) the intent to commit a dangerous felony (“felony murder”).
Adequate provocation will reduce a killing to voluntary manslaughter if the defendant was . . .
both reasonably provoked and actually provoked.
Under conspiracy and accomplice liability law, all participants in the felony will be liable for murder if . . .
the killing was foreseeable. Resistance by the store clerk was foreseeable and neither the accomplice nor the defendant had any right of self-defense under the circumstances.
Under the M’Naghten rule, a defendant is entitled to an acquittal if . . .
the proof establishes that a disease of the mind caused a defect of reason, such that the defendant lacked the ability at the time of his actions to either know the wrongfulness of his actions or understand the nature and quality of his actions.
under the M’Naghten rule, _______ is not a defense.
loss of control because of mental illness
Criminal negligence is . . .
Criminal negligence, a form of involuntary manslaughter, is an unintended killing caused by the negligence of another. Criminal negligence requires a greater deviationfrom the reasonable person standard than is required for civil liability, but less negligence thanthe reckless disregard for human life required for malice. Certainly a parent’s failure to provide medical treatment for a critically ill child is criminal negligence. Note that intent is not an element of involuntary manslaughter.
An accomplice is one who . . .
- with the intent that the crime be committed, 2. aids, counsels, or encouragesthe principal3. before or during the commission of the crime.
Difference b/w larceny by trick and obtaining property by false pretenses . . .
In the crime of false pretenses, the defen- dant obtains title to the property by means of a false representation of a material present or past fact that causes the victim to pass title to his property to the defendant, who knows his representa- tions to be false and intends thereby to defraud the victim. (Vase at the flea market) vs. arceny by trick occurs when the defendant obtains possession of another’s property by lying or trickery. Here, the bystander obtained title to, rather than mere possession of, the money, and is therefore not guilty of larceny by trick (wine bottle)
To convict a person for an attempted crime, the prosecution must establish that . . .
the defendant had an actual specific intent to cause the harm prohibited by the statute and committed an act beyond mere preparation in furtherance of that intent. Those elements—specific intent and act— are required regardless of the mental state required by the target offense. A person who tooka substantial step towards commission of the crime but was only reckless with respect to the target offense could not be found guilty of attempt. The homeowner did not intend to burn the neighbor’s home. Therefore, he cannot be guilty of attempted arson of the neighbor’s home.
At common law, each person who took part in the planning of a crime was criminally liable for ______. However, if one of the conspirators “withdrew” from the criminal effort ______, he was not liable for _____. To successfully withdraw, the actor must _____; this must be done _____.
a. the crime of conspiracy and for each offense committed in furtherance of the conspiracyb. before the substantive crimes occurredc. the subsequent crimesd. notify all members of the conspiracy that he has withdrawne. in time for them to have an opportunity to abandon the planned crimes
A school search will be held reasonable if . . .
(i) it offers a moderate chance of finding evidence of wrongdoing; (ii) the measures adopted to carry out the search are reasonably related to the objectives of the search; and (iii) the search is not excessively intru- sive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction. Here, even though the principal did not have probable cause to believe that the drugs were in the student’s purse, the principal did have sufficient reasonable grounds to search her purse.
With regard to the use of immunity to compel testimony, a state cannot use immunity to compel testimony unless
the immunity also applies in a federal prosecution.Therefore, federal prosecutors may not use evidence obtained as a result of a state grant of immunity, and vice versa.Testimony obtained by a promise of immunity MAY be used in a prosecution for perjury committed during the immunized testimony.A grant of use and derivative use immunity does NOT guarantee immunity from prosecution for any crimes. Transactional immunity guarantees immunity from prosecution for any crimes related to the transaction about which the witness testifies.Transactional immunity does NOT allow the witness to be prosecuted from evidence derived from an independent source. Use and derivative use immunity allows the witness to be prosecuted if the prosecutor can show evidence was derived from a source independent of the immunized testimony.
The Blockburger test generally prohibits . . .
multiple punishments for the same offense.
The Blockburger test generally prohibits multiple punishments for the same offense. The exception to this rule is . . .
where the offenses are intended to carry separate punishments and are imposed at a single trial. This is true even though the offenses constitute the same crime under the Blockburger test. This rule requires imposing the punishments at a single trial, not at different trials.
The doctrine of collateral estoppel prohibits a defendant from being tried or convicted of a crime if:
A prior prosecution resulted in a factual determination inconsistent with one required for conviction. For example, if a defendant was charged with robbing an individual poker player and acquitted for insufficient evidence as to identity, the defendant cannot afterward be charged with robbery of a different poker player at the same table.If a prior prosecution resulted in a mistrial because of a hung jury or because a conviction was reversed on appeal, the Double Jeopardy Clause (not collateral estoppel) is at issue.
Under the Double Jeopardy Clause, a defendant cannot be retried for the same offense. The Court in Blockburger v. United States stated a test to determine what is “the same offense.”What is the best explanation of the Blockburger test?
Two crimes do not constitute the same offense if each crime requires proof of an element that the other crime does not require
Defendant signed a confession to a crime at the police station shortly after his arrest.Is this confession sufficient in and of itself to convict Defendant?
No, a criminal conviction cannot rest entirely on an uncorroborated extrajudicial confession. If the defendant does not admit guilt in court, the prosecution must introduce extrinsic evidence that, at the least, tends to establish the trustworthiness of the admission.
Prior to accepting the guilty plea, the judge must . . .
The judge must determine that the plea is voluntary and intelligent. The judge must also ensure that the defendant knows and understands the nature of the charge and the crucial elements of the crime, along with the maximum penalty and any mandatory minimum penalty. The judge also must ensure that the defendant understands his right to plead not guilty and that he waives the right to trial if he does plead guilty.
If more than _______ months imprisonment is authorized, the offense is considered “serious” for determining whether a defendant has a constitutional right to a jury trial.
6An offense is considered serious, making a jury trial a constitutional right, when more than six months imprisonment is authorized.
When does a penalty constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment?
When it is grossly disproportionate to the offense committed
The constitutional right to a jury trial in criminal cases applies __________ offenses.
Only to serious
If a defendant successfully appeals his conviction and is retried by the same judge and again convicted, under what circumstances (if any) may a judge impose a sentence harsher than the original sentence?
Only if the sentence is based on conduct on the part of the defendant occurring after the original sentencing proceedings.The purpose of this rule is to ensure that the judge des not impose a harsher sentence out of vindictiveness. (Note that the rule does not apply if the second trial is de novo by a different judge or the sentence is imposed by a jury who were not told of the first sentence.)
Miranda warnings may need to be given, depending on whether the suspect knows this person is employed by the police. Miranda generally applies only to interrogation by the publicly paid police. It does not apply where . . .
interrogation is by an informant who the defendant does not know is working for the police. The rationale is that the warnings are intended to offset the coercive nature of police-dominated interrogation, and if the defendant does not know that he is being interrogated by the police, there is no coercive atmosphere to offset.
What will a grand jury issue if it determines that the evidence provides probable cause to prosecute?
A true bill
A Gerstein hearing is . . .
a hearing to determine probable cause to hold a detainee who was arrested without a prior finding of probable cause (e.g., if the arrest was not pursuant to an arrest warrant or grand jury indictment).
A witness subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury has no right to:
Counsel in the courtroom, Miranda warnings, or warnings that she is a potential defendant.
5th vs. 6th Amendment . . .
A defendant’s right to counsel at trial is provided for by the Sixth Amendment. The Supreme Court has read a right to counsel into the Fifth Amendment, but the right applies at custodial interrogations by the police; it does not apply at trial.
The primary purpose of a preliminary hearing is to:
Determine whether probable cause for detention existsA defendant has a Fourth Amendment right to be released from detention if there is no probable cause to hold him. The purpose of a preliminary hearing is to determine whether probable cause for detention exists.A defendant does not have the right to cross-examine witnesses at a preliminary hearing. A preliminary hearing is an informal, ex parte, nonadversarial proceeding.
__________ determine(s) whether a dwelling is “of another.” (Crim Law)
OccupancyThe requirement is that the structure be used as a dwelling by someone other than the defendant. Ownership is not relevant. An owner can commit burglary of his own structure if he offers it for rent and it is used as a dwelling by others.
Common law arson is a __________ crime.
At common law, arson consisted of the malicious burning of the dwelling of another. Malice crimes require that the defendant recklessly disregarded an obvious or high risk that the particular harmful result would occur. The intent requirement for arson is satisfied if the defendant acted with knowledge or reckless disregard that the structure would burn. A specific intent crime requires the doing of the criminal act with a specific intent or objective. A general intent crime requires the performance of the act with awareness of all factors constituting the crime; i.e., the defendant must be aware that she is acting in the proscribed way and that any attendant circumstances required by the crime are present. Strict liability offenses do not require awareness of all of the factors constituting the crime and are generally “regulatory” offenses, i.e., offenses that are part of a regulatory scheme.
Modern statutory changes have expanded upon the common law definition of burglary. Under most modern statutes, burglary can be committed _______.
At any time of day and in structures other than a dwelling
At common law, burglary was defined as . . .
the breaking and entering of the dwelling of another at nighttime with the intent of committing a felony therein. The breaking may be actual or constructive. Actual breaking requires at least a minimal use of force (e.g., opening a door that is a ajar). Constructive breaking consists of gaining entry by means of fraud, threat, or intimidation, or by use of the dwelling’s chimney.
At common law, arson consists of:
(i) the malicious; (ii) burning; (iii) of the dwelling; (iv) of another. The offense need not occur at night.
Although variously defined in different jurisdictions, embezzlement generally requires:
(i) The fraudulent;(ii) Conversion;(iii) Of property;(iv) Of another;(v) By a person in lawful possession of that property. Conversion requires only that the defendant deal with the property in a manner inconsistent with the trust arrangement pursuant to which he holds it.The passing of title is not an element of embezzlement. Title does not pass when property is embezzled.
The crime of larceny by false pretenses is committed when . . .
the defendant obtains title to the property of another by an intentional (or, in some states, a knowing) false statement with the intent to defraud another. Under the common law, the false statement had to be a false statement of past or existing fact; under the Model Penal Code, the false statement need not be of a past or existing fact. (A future false promise to perform suffices.)
Larceny by trick is distinguished from false pretenses by the fact that . . .
larceny by trick does not involve passing of title, only possession. In false pretenses, title is intended to pass.
The elements of the crime of receipt of stolen property are:
(i) receiving possession and control; (ii) of “stolen” personal property; (iii) known to have been obtained in a manner constituting a criminal offense; (iv) by another person; (v) with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of his interest in the property. Most jurisdictions define “stolen” property broadly to include property obtained by commission of any of the property offenses. The property must have “stolen” status at the time it is received by the defendant. If police have recovered the property and used it with the owner’s permission, the property is not stolen and the defendant cannot be guilty of this crime. Because of the elements requires that the property be obtained by another person, a defendant cannot be convicted of receipt of stolen property if he stole the property himself. Similarly, receipt of stolen property is not a strict liability offense; the defendant must have known it was obtained in a criminal manner.
Larceny is a crime against ______.
possession. The person from whom the property is taken needs only to have some possessory interest superior to that of the defendant. Thus, property is taken from a thief may be the subject of larceny because the thief has a possessory interest superior to the person who took the property from him. Likewise, a bailee has a possessory interest superior to someone who took the property from her.
