Crim Law and Crim Pro

Question 1

Murder Elements

Answer 1

1) Actus Reus: Voluntary Killing
2) Mens Rea: Malice Aforethought
3) Causation: Actual and Proximate Cause
4) Concurrence: Coexistence of Killing and Malice Aforethought

Question 2

Actus Reus

Answer 2

the guilty act; requires voluntary physical act [cannot be unconscious, asleep, etc]

Question 3

Malice Aforethought: Prosecutor can prove with any 1 of these 4:

Answer 3

1) Intent to kill
2) Intent to cause great bodily injury
3) Depraved heart i.e., Reckless indifference to harming human life
4) Intent to commit felony

Question 4

2 ways that a Def. can mitigate crime of murder to voluntary manslaughter

Answer 4

1-adequate provocation - if D is provoked, which arouses passion such that an ordinary person would lose control

2-imperfect self defense - aka mistaken justification - if D honestly but unreasonably believed in necessity of using deadly force

Question 5

Attempt - Elements

Answer 5

An attempt requires both a specific intent to commit the
crime and an overt act in furtherance of that intent

1) Specific intent to commit crime; and (mens rea)
2) Overt act beyond mere preparation (actus reus)

Question 6

Larceny - Elements

Answer 6

1) Actus Reus: Trespassory taking & carrying away of personal property
2) Mens Rea: Intent to permanently deprive [i.e., steal]
3) Causation: Actual and Proximate Cause
4) Concurrence: Coexistence of taking and intent to permanently deprive

Question 7

Embezzlement - Elements

Answer 7

1) Actus Reus: Fraudulent conversion of personal property
2) Mens Rea: Intent to defraud
3) Causation: Actual and Proximate Cause
4) Concurrence: Coexistence of conversion and intent to defraud

Question 8

Distinction between Larceny and Embezzlement

Answer 8

One who commits embezzlement has lawful possession at the time of misappropriation, whereas the one who commits larceny does not.
embezzlement (high level employees, fiduciaries, agents, or the cashier who takes the $20 bill from the customer and puts in her pocket rather than the cash register)

Question 9

False Pretenses - Elements

Answer 9

1) Actus Reus: Obtaining title to property by a knowing false representation of past or present material fact
2) Mens Rea: Intent to defraud
3) Causation: Actual and Proximate Cause
4) Concurrence: Coexistence of Obtaining title and Intent to defraud

Question 10

Larceny by Trick - Elements

Answer 10

1) Actus Reus: Obtaining custody (i.e., possession) to property by a knowing false representation of past or present material fact
2) Mens Rea: Intent to defraud
3) Causation: Actual and Proximate Cause
4) Concurrence: Coexistence of Obtaining custody and Intent to defraud

Question 11

False Pretenses vs. Larceny by Trick

Answer 11

larceny by trick occurs when possession of the property is obtained by the defendant’s misrepresentations, whereas false pretenses is the appropriate offense when the misrepresentations have prompted the victim to convey title to the property to the defendant.

False pretenses: Thief gets title to the property
Larceny by Trick: Thief gets possession (title does not pass)

Thief doesn’t have title in L by trick, but a thief with FP can sell title to unsuspecting buyer

Question 12

Robbery - Elements

Answer 12

A larceny with two additional elements

(1) Theft of a person with (2) force or intimidation

Question 13

False pretenses

Answer 13

False pretenses consists of obtaining title to the property of another by an intentional or knowing false statement of past or existing fact with intent to defraud another. With regard to the false representation, all that
is required is that the defendant create a false impression as to a matter of fact.

Question 14

Exceptions to Warrant Requirement:

Answer 14

1) Stop & frisk
2) Search incident to lawful arrest
3) Plain view
4) Automobile exception
5) Consent
6) Hot pursuit
7) Exigent circumstances

Question 15

Stop and Frisk

Answer 15

A police officer may stop a person without probable cause for arrest if she has an articulable and reasonable suspicion of criminal activity (Terry v Ohio).

In such circumstances, if the officer reasonably believes that the person may be armed and dangerous, she may conduct a protective frisk. The scope of the frisk is limited to a pat-down of the outer clothing for concealed instruments of assault, but the officer may reach into the suspect’s
clothing and seize any item that the officer reasonably believes, based on its “plain feel,” is a weapon or contraband

Question 16

Stop and Frisk Elements

Answer 16

1) If reasonable and articulable suspicion (more than suspicion, less than probable cause), police may:
- – briefly stop and question suspect AND
- – frisk (pat down) suspects outer clothing for weapons only
2) cops may reach into suspect’s clothing and seize an item if they reasonably believe it is contraband based on its plain feel.

Question 17

5th Am right

Answer 17

1 - Custody:

• -Would a reasonable person feel free to terminate?
• • How similar is the situation to a traditional arrest

2 - Interrogation:
– Behavior the cops should know is reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response
NOT OFFENSE SPECIFIC = once invoked, Cops cannot question the Def about any crimes.

Question 18

6th A right to counsel

Answer 18

Formal charges - Government may not elicit incriminating statements from defendant without the aid of counsel

OFFENSE SPECIFIC - When D invokes right to counsel, their right to counsel is invoked for only the present charged