Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Bar Exam > Criminal Law > Flashcards

Criminal Law Flashcards

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

Common Law vs Modern Law Merger

A
  1. Common Law - If a person engaged in conduct constituting both a felony and a misdemeanor, they could be convicted ONLY of the felony. The misdemeanor merged into the felony
  2. Modern Law - There are no mergers of crimes; however, a person who solicits another to commit a crime may not be convicted of both the solicitation and the completed crime. Similarly, a person who completes a crime after attempting it may not be convicted of both the attempt and the completed crime. Conspiracy, however, does not merge with the completed offense.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Physical Act Requirement of a Crime

A
  • Bodily movement
  • Voluntary physical act OR failed to act under circumstances imposing a legal duty to act
  • Following does not qualify: (1) conduct that is not voluntary; (2) reflexive or convulsive acts; and (3) an act performed unconscious or asleep
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

The failure to act gives rise to liability ONLY if:

A
  1. There is a legal duty to act. A legal duty arises from:
    a. Statute
    b. Contract
    c. Relationship between the parties
    d. Voluntary assumption of care; or
    e. Defendant created the peril for the victim
  2. The defendant has knowledge of the facts giving rise to the duty to act; and
  3. It is reasonably possible to perform the duty
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What crimes are considered “specific intent crimes”?

A
  • Solicitation
  • Conspiracy
  • Attempt
  • 1st Degree Premeditated Murder
  • Assault
  • Larceny
  • Embezzlement
  • False Pretenses
  • Robbery
  • Burglary
  • Forgery
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

For specific intent crimes, does merely committing the crime conclusively infer intent?

A

No, intent cannot be conclusively inferred from the mere doing of the act, but the manner in which the crime was committed may provide circumstantial evidence of intent

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

What intent is required for specific intent crimes?

A
  • Requires not only doing an act, but doing the act with a specific intent or objective
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What type of crimes are voluntary intoxication and unreasonable mistake of fact defenses for?

A

They are ONLY defenses for specific intent crimes (NOT general intent crimes)

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

What crimes are considered “malice” crimes?

A
  • Common Law Murder
  • Arson
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What intent is required for “malice” crimes?

A

Recklessness (i.e., a disregard of an obvious or high risk that the particular harmful result will occur)

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

What intent is required for “general intent” crimes?

A

The defendant has an awareness of all factors constituting the crime (i.e., the defendant is aware taht they are acting in the proscribed way and that any required attendant circumstances exist)

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

What intent is required for “strict liability” crimes?

A

No mens rea requirement - the defendant can be found guilty from the mere fact that they committed the act

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

How can you tell if a crime is a strict liability offense?

A

If the crime is in the administrative, regulatory, or morality area and there are no adverbs in the statute such as “knowingly,” “willfully,” or “intentionally,” then the statute is meant to be no intent crime of strict liability.

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

MPC Categories of Intent

A
  1. Purposely - A person acts purposely when their conscious object is to engage in certain conduct or cause a certain result
  2. Knowingly - A person acts knowingly with respect to the nature of their conduct when they are aware that their conduct is of a particular nature or that certain circumstances exist
  3. Recklessly - A person acts recklessly when they consciously disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk that circumstances exist or that a prohibited result will follor, and this disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in that situation
  4. Negligently - A person acts negligently when they fail to be aware of a substantial and unjusitifiable risk, where such failure is a substantial deviation from the standard of care
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

A person found guilty on the basis of transferred intent is usually guilty of ___ crimes: the ____ crime against the ___ victim and ____ crime against the ____ victim.

A

A person found guilty on the basis of transferred intent is usually guilty of two crimes: the completed crime against the actual victim and the attempted crime against the intended victim.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Transferred Intent

A

A defendant can be liable under the doctrine of transferred intent when they intend the harm that is actually caused, but to a different victim or object.

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

Accomplice Liability - Common Law

A
  1. Principals in the 1st Degree - Persons who actually engaged in the act or omission that constitutes the offense or who caused an innocent agent to do so
  2. Principals in the 2nd Degree - Persons who aided, advised, or encouraged the principal and were present at the crime
  3. Accessories Before the Fact - Persons who assisted or encouraged but were not present
  4. Accessories After the Fact - Persons who, with knowledge that the other committed a felony, assisted them to escape arrest or punishment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Accomplice Liability - Modern Law

A

All parties to the crime can be found guilty of the principal offense

  1. Principal - One who, with the requisite mental state, actually engages in the act or ommission that causes the criminal result
  2. Accomplice - One who aids, advises, or encourages the principal in the commission of the crime charged

Note: In most jurisdictions, an accessory after the fact is still treated separately

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Elements to Accomplice Liability

A
  1. Intent to assist the principal in the commission of the crime
  2. Intent that the principal commit the substantive offenses

If the substantive intent has recklessness or negligence as its mens rea, the elements are:
1. Intended to facilitate the commission of the crime; and
2. Acted with recklessness or negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is the scope of accomplice liability?

A

An accomplice is responsible for the crimes they did or counseled and for any other crimes committed in the course of committing the crime contemplated to the same extent as the principal, as long as the other crimes were probable or forseeable.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

How can an accomplice withdraw from accomplice liability?

A

The accomplice must do one or more of the following BEFORE the crime becomes unstoppable:
1. If the person encouraged the crime, the person must repudiate the encouragement
2. If the person aided by providing assistance to the principal, the person must do everything possible to attempt to neutralize the assistance
3. Notify the police or taking other action to prevent the crime

Note: A mere withdrawal from involvement without taking any additional action is NOT sufficient

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Elements to Conspiracy

A
  1. An agreement between two or more persons
  2. An intent to enter into the agreement; and
  3. An intent by at least two persons to achieve the objective of the agreement

Common Law: DOES NOT require an overt act
Modern Law: DOES require an overt act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What is the common law vs modern law approach to the “agreement” requirement of conspiracy?

A
  1. Common Law - Bilateral; a conspiracy requires at least two guilty minds
  2. Modern Law - Unilateral; a conspiracy requires only one party to have criminal intent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Is factual impossibility a defense to conspiracy?

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Is withdrawal a defense to conspiracy?

A

No; however, it may be a defense to crimes committed in furtherance of the conspiracy.

In order for withdrawal to be valid, the conspirator must perform an affirmative act that notifies all members of the conspiracy of their withdrawal AND notice must be given in time for the memebrs to abandon their plans.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Elements to Solicitation

A
  1. Asking, inciting, counseling, advising, urging, or commanding another
  2. To commit a crime
  3. With the intent that the person solicited commit the crime

Note: It is not necessary that the person solicited actually agree to commit the crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Elements to Attempt

A
  1. Specific intent to commit a crime
  2. An overt act in furtherance of completing the crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What is the mens rea requirement to an attempted crime?

A

To be guilty of attempt, the defendant must intend to perform an act and obtain a result that, if achieved, would constitute a crime.

Regardless of the intent necessary for the completed offense, an attempt always requires a specific intent (i.e., intent to commit the crime).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What is the actus reus requirement in an attempted crime?

A

The defendant must commit an act beyond mere preparation for the offense.

Common Law: Proximity Test - requires that the act be “dangerously close” to successful completion of the crime
Modern Law: Substantial Step Test - requires that the act or ommission constitute a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of the crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Is abandonment a defense to an attempted crime?

A

At common law, no. However, the MPC provides that a fully voluntary and complete abandonment is a defense.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Is legal abandonment a defense to an attempted crime?

A

Yes, if the defendant, having completed all acts that they had intended, would have committed no crime, they cannot be guilty of an attempt to do the same.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Is factual impossibility a defense to an attempted crime?

A

No, if the substantive crime is incapable of completion due to some physical or factual condition unknown to the defendant, it is not a defense.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Common Law Murder

A
  1. Unlawful killing
  2. Of a human being
  3. With malice aforethought
    a. Intent to kill
    b. Intent to great great bodily injury
    c. Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life; or
    d. Intent to commit a felony
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

1st Degree Murder

A
  1. Deliberate and premeditated (in a cool and dispassionate manner); and
  2. With intent or knowledge that their conduct would cause death

Note: Felony murder is also included in first degree murder

34
Q

What is considered a “felony” under first degree felony murder statutes?

A

There are three approaches to defining “felony” under first degree felony murder:
1. Enumerated felonies (burglary, arson, rape, robery, and kidnapping)
2. Any felony
3. The felony is inheritently dangerous to human life or the felony be dangerous to human life as committe

35
Q

Is the killing of a police officer first degree murder?

A

Yes, if:
1. The defendant knew the victim was a police officer; and
2. The victim was acting in the line of duty

36
Q

Second Degree Murder

A
  1. Depraved heart killing; or
  2. Any murder that is not classified as a first degree murder
37
Q

Must the defendant have committed or attempted to commit the underlying felony to be convicted for felony murder?

A

Yes

38
Q

Can a defendant be convicted of felony murder for a battery?

A

No, the felony must be distinct from the killing.

39
Q

Felony Murder

A
  1. Killing during the commission of an appropriate felony; and
  2. Intent to commit a felony
40
Q

At what point after the commission of a felony may a defendant be liable for a killing under felony murder?

A

Death must have occurred before the defendant’s “immediate flight;” once the felon has reached a plce of “temporary safety,” subsequent deaths are not felony murder

41
Q

Is a defendant liable under felony murder for the death of a co-felon if the death is the result of a victim or the police?

A

No

42
Q

Is a defendant liable under felony murder for deaths caused by someone other than a co-felon?

A
  • Proximate Cause Theory - felons are liable for the deaths of innocent victims caused by someone other than a co-felon
  • Agency Theory - the killing must be committed by a felon or their “agent”
43
Q

Voluntary Manslaughter

A
  1. Provocation that would arouse sudden and intense passion in the mind of an ordinary person, causing them to lose self-control
  2. The defendant was in fact provoked
  3. There was not sufficient time between provocation and the killing for passions of a reasonable person to cool; and
  4. The defendant in fact did not cool off between the provocation and the killin
44
Q

Imperfect Self-Defense

A

Murder may be reduced to maslaughter even though:
1. The defendant was at fault in starting the altercation; or
2. The defendant unreasonably but honestly believed the necessity of responding with deadly force

45
Q

Involuntary Manslaughter

A
  1. Killing with criminal negligence (or recklessness under MPC); or
  2. During the commission of an unlawful act
46
Q

What is required for “causation” under murder?

A
  • Cause-in-Fact - Defendant’s conduct is the cause-in-fact of the result if the result would not have occurred but for the defendant’s conduct
  • Proximate Cause - Defendant’s conduct is the proximate cause of the result if the result is a natural and probable consequence of the conduct, even if the defendant did not anticipate the precise manner in which the result occurred

Note: An act that hastens an inevitable result is still the legal cause of that result

47
Q

Elements of Battery

A
  1. Unlawful application of force
  2. Resulting in bodily injury or offensive touching; and
  3. General intent
48
Q

Elements of Aggravated Battery

A
  1. Battery with a deadly weapon
  2. Battery resulting in serious bodily harm; or
  3. Battery of a child, woman, or police officer
49
Q

Elements of Assault

A

Either:
1. An attempt to commit a battery

OR

  1. The intentional creation (other than by mere words) of
  2. A reasonable apprehension in the mind of the victim of
  3. Imminent bodily harm
50
Q

Elements of Aggravated Assault

A

Assault plus:
1. The use of a deadly or dangerous weapon; or
2. With the intent to rape, maim, or murder

51
Q

False Imprisonment

A

Unlawful confinement of a person without the person’s valid consent

The MPC requires that the confinement must interefere substantially with the victim’s liberty

52
Q

Kidnapping

A

Unlawful confinement of a person that involves either:
1. Movement of the victim; or
2. Concealment of the victim in a “secret” place

53
Q

Aggravated Kidnapping

A

Kidnapping for ransom, kidnapping for the purpose of committin gother crimes, kidnapping for offensive purposes, and child stealing

54
Q

Rape

A

Unlawful penetration with the victim’s consent.

Consent is not effective where:
1. Intercourse is accomplished by actual force
2. Intercourse is accomplished by threats of great and immediate bodily harm
3. The victim in incapable of consenting due to unconsciousness, intoxication, or mental condition; or
4. The victim is fradulently caused to believe that the act is not intercourse

55
Q

Elements of Larceny

A
  1. A taking
  2. And carrying away
  3. Of tangible personal property
  4. Of another
  5. By trespass
  6. With intent to permanently deprive that person of their interest in the property
56
Q

Elements of False Pretenses

A
  1. Obtaining title
  2. To personal property of another
  3. By an intentional false statement of past or existing fact
  4. With intent to defraud the other
57
Q

Larceny by Trick

A

Victim is tricked by misrepresentation of fact into giving up mere custody or possession of property

Note: This is different from false pretenses, which requires giving up title to property (not just custody or possession)

58
Q

Elements of Robbery

A
  1. A taking
  2. Of personal property of another
  3. From the other’s person or presence
  4. By force or threats of immediate death or physical injury to the victim, a family member, or some person in the victim’s presence
  5. With the intent to permanently deprive them of it
59
Q

Extortion

A

Common Law: Corrupt collection of an unlawful fee by an officer under color of office

Modern Law: Obtaining property by means of threats to do harm or to expose information

60
Q

Elements of Stolen Property

A
  1. Receiving possession and control
  2. Of “stolen” personal property
  3. Known to have been obtained in a manner constituting a criminal offense
  4. By another person
  5. With the intent to permanently deprive the owner of their interest
61
Q

Elements of Forgery

A
  1. Making or altering
  2. A writing with apparent legal significance
  3. So that it is false; that is, representing that it is something that it is not, not merely containing a misrepresentation
  4. With intent to defraud
62
Q

Elements of Burglary

A
  1. Breaking
  2. And entry
  3. Of a dwelling
  4. Of another
  5. At nighttime
  6. With intent to commit a felony in the structure (at the time of the breaking and entering)
63
Q

What satisfies the “breaking” requirement in burglary?

A
  • Actual Breaking - Using force
  • Constructive Breaking - Using fraud or threat

Note: If a door is wide open, this is not breaking; however, if a person pushes open an interior door to another room, then a breaking exists

64
Q

Elements of Arson

A
  1. Malicious
  2. Burning
  3. Of the dwelling
  4. Of another

Note: No specific intent is required–just a reckless disregard of obvious risk

65
Q

M’Naghten Rule

A

A defendant is considered insane if:
1. A disease of the mind
2. Cause a defect of reason
3. Such that the defendant lacked the ability at the time of their actions to either know the wrongfulness of their actions or understand the nature and quality of their actions

66
Q

Irresistible Impulse Test

A

A defendant is insane if they were unable to control their actions or conform their conduct to the law.

67
Q

Durham Test

A

A defendant is insane if the crime was a product of their mental illness

68
Q

MPC Insanity Test

A

A defendant is insane if they had a mental disease or defect and, as a result, they lacked the substantial capacity to either:
1. Appreciate the criminality of their conduct; or
2. Conform their conduct to the requirements of law

69
Q

Defense of Intoxication

A
  • Voluntary intoxication may be offered by the defendant only if the crime requires purpose (intent) or knowledge, and the intoxication prevented the defendant from formulating the purpsoe or obtaining the knowledge (NOT a defense to general intent crimes)
  • Involuntary intoxication may be offered as a defense if it results from the taking of an intoxicating substance w/o the knowledge of its nature, under direct duress imposed by another, or pursuant to medical advice while unaware of the substance’s intoxicating effect
70
Q

Are addicts and alcoholics considered to be voluntarily or involuntarily intoxicated?

A

Voluntarily intoxicated

71
Q

Infancy Defense

A
  • Less than 7yrs - No criminal liability
  • 7-14yrs - Rebuttable presumption the child is unable to understand wrongfulness
  • Older than 14yrs - Treated as an adult
72
Q

Self-Defense

A

Use of force proportional to the threat of an immediate unlawful harm

  • Non-Deadly Force - May use such force as the person reasonably believes is necessary to protect themselves from the imminent use of unlawful force upon themselves
  • Deadly Force - May use deadl force ONLY if the person is: (1) without fault, (2) is confronted with “unlawful force,” and (3) reasonably believes that they are threatened with imminent death or great bodily harm
73
Q

Is there a duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense?

A

Generally, there is no duty to retreat.

However, a minority view requires retreat before using deadly force if the victim can safely do so, unless:
1. The attack occurs in the victim’s own home
2. The attack occurs while the victim is making a lawful arrest; or
3. The assailant is in the process of robbing the victim

74
Q

If one is the aggressor in the confrontation, they may use force in defense of themself only if:

A
  1. They effectively withdraw from the confrontation and communicate to the other their desire to do so; or
  2. The victim of the initial aggression suddenly escalates the minor fight to a deadly altercation adn the initial aggressor has no chance to withdraw
75
Q

Defense of Others

A

A defendant has the right to defend others if they reasonably believe that the person assisted has the legal right to use fore in their own defense.

All that is necessary is the reasonable appearance of the right to use force.

Generally, there need be no special relationship between the defendant and the person in whose defense they acted.

76
Q

Defense of a Dwelling

A

A person may use non-deadly force in defense of their dwelling when, and to the extent tat, they reasonably believe that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate another’s unlawful entery into or attack upon their dwelling.

Deadly force may be used only to prevent a violent entry and when the person reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to prevent a personal attack on themselves or another in the dwelling, or to preven an entery to commit a felony in the dwelling.

77
Q

Defense of Possessions

A

Deadly force may never be used in defense of property. Reasonable nondeadly force may be used to defend property in one’s possession from what they reasonably believe is an imminent, unlawful intereference.

78
Q

Excuse of Duress

A

Defense to a crime other than intentional homicide that the defendant reasonably believed that another person would imminently inflict death or great bodily harm upon them or a member of their family if the defendant did not commit the crime

79
Q

Excuse of Necessity

A

It is a defense to a crime that the person reasonably believed that commission of the crime was necessary to avoid an imminent and greater injury to society than that involved the crime.

The test is objective and a good faith belief is not sufficient.

80
Q

Mistake or Ignorance of Fact

A
  • Mistake or ignorance of fact is relevant to criminal liability only if it shows that the defendant lacked the state of mind required for the crime
  • If the mistake is offered to disporve a specific intent, the mistake need not be reasonable; however, if it is offered to disprove any other state of mind, it must have been a reasonable mistake or ignorance
81
Q

Mistake or Ignorance of Law

A

Generally, it is not a defense that the defendant believed that their activity would not be a crime, even if that belief was reasonable and based on the advice of an attorney.

82
Q

Entrapment

A

Entrapment exists only if:
1. The criminal design originated with law enforcement officers; and
2. The defendant was not predisposed to commit the crime prior to contact by the government

Bar Exam (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions