Criminal Law Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Does common law conspiracy require an overt act?

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Does the common law use a unilateral or bilateral approach to conspiracy?

A

Bilateral

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What are the elements of the offense of false pretenses?

A

generally consists of: (i) obtaining title; (ii) to the property of another; (iii) by an intentional (or, in some states, knowing) false statement of past or existing fact; (iv) with intent to defraud the other

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the elements of the offense of larceny?

A

Larceny is the taking and carrying away of the tangible personal property of another by trespass with the intent to permanently (or for an unreasonable time) deprive the owner (or person in possession) of his interest in the property

Larceny consists of: (i) A taking; (ii) And carrying away (asportation); (iii) Of tangible personal property; (iv) Of another; (v) By trespass; (vi) With intent to permanently (or for an unreasonable time) deprive the person of his interest in the property (this includes using the property in a way that substantially risks its loss or destruction)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the differences between embezzlement and larceny?

A

In embezzlement, the misappropriation of the property occurs while the defendant has lawful, NOT wrongful, possession of it. On the other hand, in larceny, it occurs generally at the time the defendant obtains wrongful possession of the property.
In embezzlement, since the defendant is already in possession of the property, there is NO need that he take and carry away the property. Rather, embezzlement requires a fraudulent conversion of the property.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the differences between larceny by false pretenses and larceny by trick?

A

False pretenses differs from larceny by trick in that title is obtained through false pretenses, but only custody of the property is obtained through larceny by trick. What is obtained depends upon what the victim intended to convey to the defendant.

For both crimes, the victim must actually be deceived by, or act in reliance on, the misrepresentation, and this must be a major factor (or the sole cause) of the victim passing title (larceny by false pretenses) or custody (larceny by trick) to the defendant.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Can you commit larceny in taking back your own property from a repair-person without paying?

A

It is possible to commit larceny of your own property if another person, such as a bailee, has a superior right to possession of the property at that time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Does a defendant need to be found guilty of the underlying felony in order to be convicted of felony murder?

A

No. To convict a defendant of felony murder, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed a felony (i.e., he is factually guilty of the felony). However, the defendant need not actually be convicted of the underlying felony if the statute of limitations for the felony has expired.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are the elements to the plain view exception?

A

To make a warrantless seizure, the police (1) must be legitimately on the premises where the item is found; (2) the item must be evidence, contraband, or a fruit or instrumentality of a crime; (3) the item must be in plain view; and (4) it must be immediately apparent (i.e., probable cause) that the item is evidence, contraband, or a fruit or instrumentality of a crime.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Can a cop ask a person questions during a traffic stop without reading them their Miranda warnings?

A

Routine traffic stops are considered noncustodial in nature because they are brief and temporary, and, therefore, Miranda warnings are not required to ask questions of detained motorists

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

When can police search the interior of a car incident to an arrest?

A

After arresting the occupant of a vehicle, the police may search the interior of the vehicle incident to the arrest if (i) the arrestee is unsecured and still may gain access to the interior of the vehicle, or (ii) the police reasonably believe that evidence of the offense for which the person was arrested may be found in the vehicle

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What constitutes a seizure?

A

For purposes of the Fourth Amendment, a seizure occurs when a reasonable person would believe that he is not free to leave. The courts consider the totality of the circumstances in making this determination

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

If a search warrant does not name a person found in the place searched, may police search them?

A

No, unless there is some exception to the warrant requirement (e.g., if they decided to arrest that person based on probable cause, they could search them incident to arrest)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

When can police re-engage with a suspect after the suspect invokes one of their Miranda rights?

A
  • Right to remain silent: if accused re-initiate dialogue OR after a significant period of time, police can ask about unrelated crimes, as long as D is re-Mirandized
  • Right to counsel: if accused re-initiates dialogue OR 14 days after D leaves custody
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

When can a confession obtained in violation of Miranda be used?

A

A confession obtained in violation of Miranda, but otherwise voluntary, can be used for the limited purpose of impeaching a defendant who testifies at trial.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

When is an offense considered serious enough to give right to a jury trial?

A

An offense is considered serious, making a jury trial a constitutional right, when more than six months’ imprisonment is authorized.

17
Q

Does the Fifth Amendment protect a person’s right not to incriminate others?

A

No. The Fifth Amendment right to remain silent does not afford a privilege to refuse to incriminate others

18
Q

Can a person’s post-Miranda silence be used against them if they end up testifying?

A

No

19
Q

When can a co-defendant’s confession be admitted against the other co-defendant?

A

Where two persons are tried together and one has given a confession implicating the other, the general rule is that the Sixth Amendment right to confront adverse witnesses prohibits the use of such a statement. This problem arises because of the inability of the nonconfessing defendant to compel the confessing co-defendant to take the stand for cross-examination at their joint trial. As exceptions to the general rule, the statement may be admitted if: (i) all portions of the statement referring to the other defendant can be eliminated (so that there is no indication of that defendant’s involvement); (ii) the confessing defendant takes the stand and subjects himself to cross-examination with respect to the truth or falsity of what the statement asserts; or (iii) the confession of the nontestifying co-defendant is being used to rebut the defendant’s claim that his confession was obtained coercively, in which case the jury must be instructed as to the purpose of the admission

20
Q

What can a defendant be retried with, after their conviction was reversed on appeal?

A

The Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits retrying a defendant whose conviction has been reversed on appeal for any offense more serious than that for which she was convicted at the first trial

21
Q

What are the tests for insanity?

A

The M’Naghten rule provides for acquittal if 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: (i) know the wrongfulness of his actions; or (ii) understand the nature and quality of his actions.

Irresistible impulse test, which provides for acquittal if, because of mental illness, the defendant was unable to control his actions or to conform his conduct to the law

Pursuant to the Model Penal Code, a defendant is entitled to acquittal if he suffered from a mental disease or defect and as a result lacked substantial capacity to either: (i) appreciate the criminality of his conduct; or (ii) conform his conduct to the requirements of law. This represents a combination of the M’Naghten and irresistible impulse test

22
Q

Are dying declarations available in attempted homicide cases?

A

No