Criminal Law Flashcards
Burden of proof in criminal cases
Prosecution must prove guilt of all elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt
Defendant has burden to prove any affirmative defenses
Construction worker gets drunk and trespasses to operate heavy machinery. Found guilty for recklessly damaging property why
Intoxication made it reckless
Is verbal harassment adequate provocation for deadly force
No
The person who did the harassing can claim self defense even if verbal harassment triggered the attack
Effect on charges if successfully claim self defense
Makes homicide excusable and no guilt of crime
A person may use deadly force in self defense if
1) he is without fault/not the initial aggressor
2) he is confronted with unlawful force
3) he reasonably believes he is threatened with imminent death or great bodily harm
And in majority of states: deadly force in self defense is allowed even if could be avoided by retreating
Police have an arrest warrant
They go to friends house where they think he’s hiding
Friend says guy isn’t there
Police push through anyway and find him hiding in closet next to drugs
What’s admissible
The drugs are suppressed bc police needed a separate search warrant to enter the 3rd party’s home and any evidence obtained are inadmissible as fruit of an unconstitutional search
But the arrest is valid
2 ppl pulled over by police for running a red light
Man gives woman a package to hide in her bag before officer walks up
Man tells officer “I’m clean she has the stash” and points to her
Officer now searches woman’s bag and finds package, opens it to find drugs
Result:
Evidence is admissible under the automobile exception bc:
- statement gave police probable cause to believe there was evidence of a crime inside the car
- probable cause allows police to search anywhere in the vehicle including any containers
Officer thinks GF lives in trailer with defendant
GF gives permission for officer to search when D is not home
Officer opens drawers and containers in Ds room and finds drugs
Result?
Drugs found are admissible bc this was a valid search conducted pursuant to consent
Consent is an exception to the warrant requirement and is valid as long as police reasonably believe the person who gives the consent had the authority to do so
When can suspect invoke a Miranda 5th amendment right to counsel
At any time prior to or during a custodial interrogation
If invoked all questioning must cease until the accused is provided with an attorney or reinitiates questioning herself - they cannot ask about different crimes either (with silence invoked only they can)
When can police reinitiate questioning of a suspect in custody about a different crime that the one accused
When they have not invoked their Miranda rights at all or
They have only invoked their right to silence (but have not invoked their right to counsel)
Conspiracy accusations of man and woman
Both confess implicating the other
If woman goes free based on the man’s confession what likely happened?
The man refused to testify at trial and therefore was not subject to cross examination regarding his confession which means woman was not able to confront him which is her right
Confrontation clause
Under the 6th amendment a defendant in a criminal prosecution has the right to confront adverse witnesses at trial
A confession Will not be properly admitted if
The witness is not available for cross examination, as it would be a violation of confrontation clause rights
Double jeopardy creates a bar as soon as
the D is retried for the same offense
