Criminal Flashcards
Specific Intent Crimes
Solicitation
Conspiracy
Attempt
First Degree Murder
Assault
Larseny
Embezzlement
Forgery
Robbery
Burglary
False pretenses
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.
six
The trial court expressly based its imposition of the maximum possible sentence for the conviction on the defendant’s refusal to reveal the names of the persons from whom he purchased the stolen weapons. Should the appellate court affirm the sentence?
Affirm, right to remain silent does not extend to incrimination of others
4 factors whether the def’s right to a speedy trial was violated:
length of the delay
reason for the delay
whether the def asserted his right
prejudice to the def
CL Robbery elements
larceny from other’s person or presence by force or intimidation
Burglary specific intent is:
intent to commit felony therein
What is required for accomplice liability
Intent to be part of the conspiracy
intent to commit crime
actually aids or encourages
A shopper at a flea market noticed a vase and asked a nearby person how much it cost. The person replied, “One hundred dollars.” The shopper paid him the money and took the vase. The person, who was not the owner of the vase but merely a bystander, absconded with the $100.
What crime at common law has the bystander committed with respect to the $100?
Obtaining property by false pretenses. False pretences crime is where defendant obtain TITLE (as opposed to possession). What the man intended to give governs. Here, he intended to give title to money.
Giving money without any restrictions is giving title to money. Thus, false pretences and not larcent by trick (possession of property).
If a person acted with recklessness and took a substantial step toward committing a general intent crime, but the crime did not manifest itself. Can he be liable for an attempt?
No. Because attempt is a specific intent crime and requires an intent to commit X. Recklessness is not enough.
If a person attempted to to kill his wife, and accidently injured his neighbor, who did not die. Can the defendant be charged with an attempted murder of the neighbor due to transferred intent doctrine?
No. Transfer intent is not applicable to attempts.
Can a person have an expectation of privacy in his farming land
Yes, if it is curtilage. No, if it is an open field (even if it is fenced).
at CL, what are the age brackets for infancy defense:
under 7 no liability
7 to 14 rebuttable presumption that the child cannot understand the wrongfulness of his acts
14+ treated as adults
What is the infancy defense at MPC?
cannot be convicted of a crime under 13 or 14.
A man was tried in state court for possession of heroin. The prosecution offered in evidence five rolled-up toy balloons containing heroin, which police officers had found on a table in the man’s apartment. At a hearing on the defense’s motion to suppress, testimony was presented that established that the police had put the apartment under surveillance and had watched a police informant go to the door of the apartment, hand four balloons of heroin to the man, and leave. The police had then knocked on the apartment door, identified themselves as police officers, and demanded entrance. Having heard nothing for 30 seconds, the police had then broken down the door and entered the apartment, discovering the heroin. The police had intended to arrest the man for the purchase of heroin, a felony. When they had gotten inside the apartment, they discovered that the man had left by a back exit. He was later arrested at the nearby newsstand.
The trial court denied the motion to suppress, and the case is on appeal following the man’s conviction for possession of heroin. How should the appellate court rule?
The appellate court should reverse the conviction on Fourth Amendment grounds. In Payton v. New York (1980), the United States Supreme Court held that, absent an emergency, a forcible, warrantless entry into a residence for the purpose of making a felony arrest is an unconstitutional violation of the Fourth Amendment as made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.
A homeowner returned home from work one day to find a robber in her living room. After a brief physical altercation, the homeowner ran to a bedroom, hid in a closet, and called 911 on her cell phone. Police officers arrived in less than two minutes and were able to apprehend the robber as he tried to run out the front door. Once they made sure he was locked in the police car, one of the officers went to speak with the homeowner about what had happened. She was still crying and shaking when the officer found her, and she said, “Thank you for catching him! He punched me in the head as I was running away!” The robber was charged with robbery and assault. Traumatized, the homeowner left the country and cannot be traced, despite the efforts of the prosecutor. The prosecutor intends to call the officer to testify as to the homeowner’s statement.
Should the court allow the officer’s testimony?
No, because admitting the homeowner’s statement would violate the defendant’s constitutional rights.
Although only a few minutes had passed since the physical altercation and the homeowner was still upset, the robber no longer posed any danger because he was locked in the police car and the homeowner was aware of this (“Thank you for catching him!”). Therefore, the homeowner’s statements to the officer were testimonial. Because the homeowner is unavailable to testify at trial and the robber has had no opportunity to cross-examine the statements, admitting them at trial through the testimony of the officer would violate the Confrontation Clause.
