Criminal Law

Question 1

When does a state have jurisdiction over a crime?

Answer 1

(1) The ACT/CONDUCT was committed in the state OR (2) the RESULT occurred in the state.
- There can be two states that both have jurisdiction.

Question 2

What’s the difference between felonies and misdemeanors?

Answer 2

Felonies are generally punishable by death or imprisonment for more than one year; other crimes are misdemeanors.

Question 3

How does the concept of Merger apply under modern Criminal Law?

Answer 3

Generally, there is no merger of crimes in American law. However, a person who solicits another to commit a crime may not be convicted of both the solicitation and the completed crime (if the person solicited does complete it). 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.

Question 4

What are the general elements of a crime?

Answer 4

A physical act (actus reus), a mental state (mens rea), and a concurrence of the act and mental state. A crime may also require proof of a result and causation (meaning the act caused the harmful result).

Question 5

What is a Physical Act for purposes of criminal law (common law)?

Answer 5

For a defendant’s bodily movement to be a Physical Act, D must have either performed a voluntary physical act or failed to act under circumstances imposing a legal duty to act.

Question 6

When does an omission to act give rise to criminal liability (at common law)?

Answer 6

The failure to act gives rise to liability only if:
(1) There is a legal duty to act (EX: statute; contract; relationship between parties; voluntary assumption of care by D; D created the peril for V),
(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.

Question 7

Can common law intent be inferred from an action for criminal law purposes?

Answer 7

Specific Intent: The existence of a specific intent cannot be conclusively imputed from the mere doing of the act, but the manner in which the crime was committed may provide circumstantial evidence of intent.
General Intent: A jury may infer the required general intent merely from the doing of the act.

Question 8

What defenses are available ONLY for specific intent crimes (common law)?

Answer 8

Voluntary intoxication AND unreasonable mistake of fact.

Question 9

What crimes are specific intent crimes (at common law)?

Answer 9

SCAFALEFRBF: Students can always fake a laugh, even for ridiculous bar facts.
- Solicitation: Intent to have the person solicited commit the crime.
- Conspiracy: Intent to have the crime completed.
- Attempt: Intent to complete the crime.
- First degree premeditated murder: Premeditated intent to kill.
- Assault: Intent to commit a battery.
- Larceny: Intent to permanently deprive the other of their interest in the property taken.
- Embezzlement: Intent to defraud.
- False pretenses: Intent to defraud
- Robbery: Intent to permanently deprive the other of their interest in the property taken.
- Burglary: Intent to commit a felony in the dwelling.
- Forgery: Intent to defraud.

Question 10

What are the Malice crimes at common law? What is required to meet the standard for malice?

Answer 10

(Second Degree) Murder AND arson. Malice requires a reckless disregard of obvious or high risk that a particular harm will occur.

Question 11

What is required for strict liability in criminal law (at common law)? How can you tell if the crime on the exam is a strict liability crime?

Answer 11

There is no mens rea requirement–D is liable merely for committing the voluntary act.
NOTE: 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 a no intent crime of strict liability.

Question 12

What standard is applied when a statute use the mental states of Purposely, Knowingly, or Recklessly? What about for negligence.

Answer 12

Subjective standard. Objective for negligence.

Question 13

When does someone act Purposefully under the MPC?

Answer 13

A person acts purposely when their conscious objective/intent is to engage in certain conduct or cause a certain result.

Question 14

When does someone act knowingly under the MPC?

Answer 14

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.
- Also, the person is deemed to be aware of these circumstances when they are
aware of a high probability that they exist and deliberately avoid learning the truth. The person acts knowingly with respect to the result of their conduct when they know that their conduct will necessarily or very likely cause a particular result.

Question 15

When does someone act Recklessly under the MPC?

Answer 15

A person acts recklessly when they consciously disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk that circumstances exist or that a prohibited result will follow, and this disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in that situation.
- Recklessness involves both objective (“unjustifiable risk”) and subjective (awareness) elements.

Question 16

When does someone act Negligently under the MPC?

Answer 16

A person acts negligently when they fail to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk, where such failure is a substantial deviation from the standard of care.
- The defendant must have taken a very unreasonable risk (higher than the standard for Torts).

Question 17

When does Transferred Intent apply for criminal law purposes?

Answer 17

The 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.
- Applies to homicide, battery, and arson (NOT ATTEMPT!).

Question 18

What sort of mental concurrence is required for mental fault with a physical act?

Answer 18

The defendant must have had the intent necessary for the crime at the time they committed the act constituting the crime, and the intent must have prompted the act.

Question 19

Who are principals in the first degree?

Answer 19

At common law, principals in the first degree are persons who engage in an act that constitutes a crime.

Question 20

Who are principals in the second degree?

Answer 20

At common law, principals in the second degree are persons who aid, advise, or encourage and are present.

Question 21

Who are accessories before the fact?

Answer 21

At common law, accessories before the fact are persons who assisted or encouraged but were not present.

Question 22

Who are accessories after the fact?

Answer 22

At common law, accessories after the fact are persons who, with knowledge that another committed a felony, assisted them to escape arrest or punishment.

Question 23

Under modern statutes, what are principals, accomplices, and accessories after the fact?

Answer 23

• The principal is one who, with the requisite mental state, actually engages in the act or omission that causes the criminal result.
• An accomplice is one who aids, advises, or encourages the principal in the commission of the crime charged.
• An accessory after the fact is one who assists another knowing that they have committed a felony in order to help them escape.

Question 24

In order to be convicted of a substantive crime as an accomplice, what intent must the accomplice have?

Answer 24

(1) the intent to assist the principal in the commission of a crime; and (2) the intent that the principal commit the substantive offense.
- Generally, mere knowledge that a crime will result is not enough for accomplice liability.

Question 25

What are the elements of accomplice liability?

Answer 25

An accomplice is a person who (1) has the intent to assist the principal and (2) has the intent that the principal commit the crime and (3) actually aids, counsels, or encourages the principal in the commission of the crime. - When the substantive crime has negligence or recklessness as its mens rea, the intent element is satisfied if the accomplice (1) intended to facilitate the crime and (2) acted with negligence or recklessness.

Question 26

What is the Scope of Accomplice Liability?

Answer 26

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 foreseeable.

Question 27

What are the requirements and effects of withdrawal from a crime involving accomplice liability?

Answer 27

To be effective, Withdrawal must (1) occur before the crime becomes unstoppable, (2) the withdrawer must repudiate their encouragement and (3) neutralize their prior assistance and (4) notify the police or take other action to prevent the crime. - If an effective Withdrawal, then the accomplice cannot be held liable.

Question 28

What are the elements of conspiracy?

Answer 28

A conspiracy requires (1) an agreement between two or more persons to carry out an illegal act; (2) an intent to enter into the agreement; and (3) an intent by at least two persons to achieve the objective of the agreement (criminal intent). - The object of the conspiracy must be criminal or the achievement of a lawful object by criminal means. - Modern statutes require an overt act--an act of mere preparation should suffice. Note that this was not required at common law.

Question 29

What are the modern vs common law approaches to conspiracy multi-party intent requirements?

Answer 29

Modern/Unilateral Approach: Only 1 party must have criminal intent. Traditional/Bilateral Approach: At least 2 parties must have criminal intent.

Question 30

When will a conspirator face liability for his co-conspirators' crimes?

Answer 30

A conspirator may be held liable for crimes committed by other conspirators if the crimes (1) were committed in furtherance of the objectives of the conspiracy and (2) were foreseeable.

Question 31

What are the defenses to conspiracy?

Answer 31

NOT DEFENSES: Factual impossibility; Withdrawal from Conspiracy (but may be a defense to crimes committed in furtherance of conspiracy) - Making Withdrawal Effective as to Crimes in Furtherance: To withdraw, a conspirator must perform an affirmative act that notifies ALL members of the conspiracy of their withdrawal. Notice must be given IN TIME FOR THE MEMBERS TO ABANDON their plans. If the conspirator has also provided assistance as an accomplice, they must try to neutralize the assistance.

Question 32

What is Solicitation in criminal law?

Answer 32

Asking another person to commit a crime with the intent that the person commit it.

Question 33

What is Attempt in criminal law? What are its elements/requirements?

Answer 33

An act done with the specific intent to commit a crime that falls short of completing it. ELEMENTS: (1) Intent to commit the crime and (2) an OVERT ACT (An act beyond mere preparation). --- Traditional/Proximity Test: Dangerously close to completion. --- Modern/Majority Test: Substantial step in course of conduct.

Question 34

What are the merger rules for conspiracy and completed crimes?

Answer 34

Conspiracy and the completed crime are distinct offenses; there is no merger. A defendant may be convicted of and punished for both.

Question 35

Is Abandonment a valid defense to Attempt?

Answer 35

Common Law: Not a defense. MPC: Valid defense if fully voluntary and complete (renunciation of criminal purpose, not just inconvenient).

Question 36

What is the definition of murder at common law?

Answer 36

Unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought [VERY IMPORTANT TOPIC]. - Malice Aforethought: Intent to kill (first degree); intent to inflict great bodily injury (second degree); reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (second degree). - A killing committed with the intent to commit a felony is murder at common law (BARRK: burglary; Arson; Rape; Robbery; Kidnapping). NOTE: Intentional use of a deadly weapon authorizes a permissive inference of intent to kill.

Question 37

What are the types of Malice aforethought at common law?

Answer 37

(1) Intent to kill. (2) Intent to inflict serious bodily injury. (3) Intent to commit a dangerous felony (unintentional killing resulting from the commission or attempted commission of a serious or inherently dangerous felony). - Serious or inherently dangerous: Burglary, Arson, Robbery, Rape, Kidnapping (BARRK). (4) Depraved Heart Murder: Unintentional killing that results from D's reckless conduct.

Question 38

What are the types of first degree murder?

Answer 38

[VERY IMPORTANT TOPIC] - Deliberate and Premeditated First Degree Murder: If the defendant made the decision to kill in a cool and dispassionate manner and actually reflected on the idea of killing, even if only for a very brief period, it is first degree murder. The defendant must have acted with intent or knowledge that their conduct would cause death. - First Degree Felony Murder: A killing committed during the commission of an enumerated felony is felony murder and called first degree murder. - Certain Killings (statute): Some statutes make killings performed in certain ways (for example, by torture) or with certain victims first degree murder. - Police Officer: Many states make the homicide of a police officer first degree murder (the defendant must know the victim is a law enforcement officer, and the victim must be acting in the line of duty).

Question 39

What is second degree murder?

Answer 39

If the jurisdiction divides murder into degrees, second degree murder is usually classified as a depraved heart killing (a killing done with a reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life) or any murder that is not classified as a first-degree murder.

Question 40

What is the Felony Murder Rule? What are its limitations?

Answer 40

Any death—even an accidental death—caused in the commission of, or in an attempt to commit, a felony is murder. Malice is implied from the intent to commit the underlying felony. - Limitations: (1) D must have committed or attempted to commit the underlying felony; (2) the felony must be distinct from the killing itself; (3) death must have been foreseeable; (4) death must have been caused before the immediate flight from the felony ended; (5) a killing resulting from a police officer killing a co-felon doesn't count (majority of jurisdictions). - Remember that voluntary intoxication is a defense to specific intent crimes.

Question 41

At common law, which crimes are considered to be inherently dangerous? What significance from this?

Answer 41

Burglary, Arson, Rape, Robbery, and Kidnapping (BARRK). These get us to first degree felony murder.

Question 42

When is a felon liable for the deaths of innocent victims caused by someone other than the co-felon?

Answer 42

Proximate Cause Theory (minority view): A felon is liable for the deaths of foreseeable innocent victims caused by someone other than the co-felon. Agency Theory (majority view): A felon is liable only if the killing was committed by a felon or their agent.

Question 43

What result when a co-felon is killed in the commission of a felony?

Answer 43

Under the felony murder doctrine, a killing committed during the course of a felony is murder, malice being implied from the intent to commit the underlying felony. However, under the majority view, criminal liability for murder cannot be based on the death of a co-felon from resistance by the victim or police pursuit.

Question 44

What is Voluntary Manslaughter and when does it apply?

Answer 44

Voluntary manslaughter is (1) an intentional killing (2) in the heat of passion that (3) would be murder but for the existence of adequate provocation. - Provocation is adequate only if: (1) it would arouse sudden and intense passion in the mind of an ordinary person, causing them to lose self-control; (2) D 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) D in fact did not cool off.

Question 45

What is Imperfect Self Defense?

Answer 45

Some states recognize an “imperfect self-defense” doctrine under which murder may be reduced to manslaughter even though (1) the defendant was at fault in starting the altercation; OR (2) the defendant unreasonably but honestly believed in the necessity of responding with deadly force (meaning the defendant’s actions do not qualify for self-defense).

Question 46

What is Involuntary Manslaughter?

Answer 46

- Criminal Negligence: An unintentional killing resulting from D's criminally negligent behavior. D fails to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk, such that there is substantial deviation from the standard care of a reasonable person. - Misdemeanor Manslaughter: An unintentional killing resulting from a misdemeanor or the commission of an unenumerated felony (i.e., NOT a BARRK felony).

Question 47

When is a defendant's conduct a cause-in-fact of a crime?

Answer 47

A defendant’s conduct is the cause-in-fact of the result if the result would not have occurred “but for” the defendant’s conduct.

Question 48

When is a defendant's conduct the proximate cause of a crime?

Answer 48

A 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. Superseding factors break the chain of proximate causation. - An act that hastens an inevitable result is still the legal cause of that result. Also, simultaneous acts of two or more persons may be independently sufficient causes of a single result. - A victim’s preexisting weakness or fragility, even if unforeseeable, does not break the chain of causation.

Question 49

What are the limitations on causation in criminal law?

Answer 49

- Year and a Day: Traditionally, for a defendant to be liable for homicide, the death of the victim must occur within one year and one day from infliction of the injury or wound. Most states that have reviewed this rule have abolished it. - Intervening Acts: Generally, an intervening act shields the defendant from liability if the consequence is outside the foreseeable sphere of risk created by the defendant. Note that a third party’s negligent medical care and the victim’s refusal of medical treatment for religious reasons are both foreseeable risks, so the defendant would be liable.

Question 50

What is battery in criminal law?

Answer 50

The (1) unlawful application of force (2) to the person of another (3) resulting in either bodily injury or offensive touching. - Need not be intentional, and the force need not be direct. - This is a general intent crime, so the additional defenses are not available.

Question 51

What is Aggravated Battery in criminal law?

Answer 51

Most jurisdictions treat the following as aggravated batteries and punish them as felonies: (1) battery with a deadly weapon; (2) battery resulting in serious bodily harm; and (3) battery of a child, woman, or police officer.

Question 52

What is assault in criminal law?

Answer 52

An assault is either (1) the attempt to commit battery or (2) the intentional creation (other than by mere words) of reasonable apprehension of imminent bodily harm. - NOTE: If there has been an actual touching of the victim, the crime can only be battery, not assault.

Question 53

What is Aggravated Assault in criminal law?

Answer 53

Aggravated assault is an assault plus one of the following: (1) the use of a deadly or dangerous weapon, or (2) with the intent to rape, maim, or murder.

Question 54

What is False Imprisonment in criminal law?

Answer 54

The unlawful confinement of a person without their valid consent. - The M.P.C. requires that the confinement must “interfere substantially” with the victim’s liberty. It is not confinement to simply prevent a person from going where they desire to go, as long as alternative routes are available to them.

Question 55

What is kidnapping in criminal law?

Answer 55

Modern statutes often define kidnapping as unlawful confinement of a person that involves either (1) some movement of the victim, or (2) concealment of the victim in a “secret” place.

Question 56

What is Aggravated Kidnapping in criminal law?

Answer 56

Aggravated kidnapping includes kidnapping for ransom, kidnapping for the purpose of committing other crimes, kidnapping for offensive purposes, and child stealing (the consent of a child to their detention or movement is not of importance because a child is incapable of giving valid consent).

Question 57

What is rape in criminal law?

Answer 57

Intercourse without effective consent. Lack of effective consent exists where: (1) Intercourse is accomplished by actual force; (2) Intercourse is accomplished by threats of great and immediate bodily harm; (3) The victim is incapable of consenting due to unconsciousness, intoxication, or mental condition; OR (4) The victim is fraudulently caused to believe that the act is not intercourse.

Question 58

What is common law larceny in criminal law?

Answer 58

The taking and carrying away of tangible personal property of another by trespass (meaning, without V's consent) with the intent to permanently deprive. - Even the slightest movement of the property is sufficient. - The intent to PERMANENTLY deprive is AT THE TIME OF THE TAKING. - Intent to permanently deprive may be found from using the property in such a way so as to create a substantial risk of loss will be sufficient.

Question 59

What is an insufficient intent for common law larceny?

Answer 59

- Belief that the property is the defendant's. - Intent to borrow the property. - Intent to keep property as the repayment of a debt.

Question 60

What is continuing trespass for common law larceny purposes in criminal law?

Answer 60

D wrongfully takes property without the intent to permanently deprive and later decides to keep it, then this is larceny.

Question 61

What is Embezzlement?

Answer 61

Embezzlement is: (1) the fraudulent (2) conversion (that is, dealing with the property in a manner inconsistent with the arrangement by which defendant has possession) (3) of personal property (4) by a person IN LAWFUL POSSESSION of that property. - NOTE: the embezzler doesn't need to get the benefit of the illegal act.

Question 62

What is False Pretenses for criminal law purposes?

Answer 62

The offense of false pretenses is: (1) D obtaining title (2) to the personal property of another (3) by an intentional false statement of a past or existing fact (4) with the intent to defraud the other. - V must actually be deceived or act in reliance on the deceiver's representations. - Cash transferred without any limitations is transferred title. - Future Promises: Traditionally, D’s misrepresentation must have related to a past or present fact, and false promises to do something in the future, even without the present intent to perform, were not sufficient. However, under the M.P.C. and the modern prevailing view, any false representation suffices, including a false promise to perform in the future.

Question 63

What is Larceny by Trick?

Answer 63

If V is tricked—by a misrepresentation of fact—into giving up mere custody or possession of property (NOT title), the crime is larceny by trick.

Question 64

What is Robbery in criminal law?

Answer 64

Robbery is (1) taking of personal property (2) of another (3) from the other's person or presence (4) by force or threats (5) with the intent to permanently deprive. - The presence requirement is broadly drawn.

Question 65

What is Extortion in criminal law?

Answer 65

Larceny + Threat of future harm - Common law extortion consists of the corrupt collection of an unlawful fee by an officer under color of office. - Under modern statutes, extortion (blackmail) often consists of obtaining property by means of threats to do harm or to expose information. - Under some statutes, the crime is complete when threats are made with the intent to obtain property; meaning, the property need not be obtained. NOTE: Threats may be of FUTURE harm!

Question 66

What is Receipt of Stolen Property in criminal law?

Answer 66

(1) Receiving possession and control (2) of "stolen" personal property (3) Known to have been obtained in a manner constituting a criminal offense by another person (4) with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of their interest in it.

Question 67

What is Theft under the MPC?

Answer 67

Under many modern statutes and the M.P.C., some or all of the property offenses are combined and defined as the crime of “theft.”

Question 68

What is forgery in criminal law?

Answer 68

Forgery is the making or altering of a false writing with the intent to defraud. More specifically, forgery consists of the following: (1) Making or altering (by drafting, adding, or deleting) (2) A writing with apparent legal significance (for example, a contract, not a painting) (3) So that it is false; that is, representing that it is something that it is not, not merely containing a misrepresentation (for example, a fake warehouse receipt, but not an inaccurate real warehouse receipt) (4) With the intent to defraud (although no one need actually have been defrauded)

Question 69

What is common law burglary in criminal law?

Answer 69

(1) The breaking (CL: creating or enlarging an opening by at least minimal force, fraud, or intimidation; if D had the resident’s consent to enter, the entry is not a breaking) and (2) entering (placing any portion of the body or any instrument used to commit the crime into the structure) of (3) a dwelling (CL: used for sleeping purposes) (4) of another (ownership is irrelevant; occupancy by someone other than D is all that is required) (5) at nighttime (removed by many modern statutes) (6) with the intent to commit a felony in the structure (felony need not be carried out to constitute burglary).

Question 70

What is common law arson in criminal law?

Answer 70

The malicious (intent or reckless disregard) burning of the dwelling of another. - ELEMENTS: (1) A specific intent to commit the target offense AND (2) an overt act (a substantial step) in furtherance of that intent. - Malice: no specific intent required. Need "reckless disregard or indifference of an obvious risk." - NOTE: recklessness doesn't count/apply for ATTEMPT (it's not a specific intent crime).

Question 71

What is the damage required for common law arson?

Answer 71

Scorching (blackening by smoke or discoloration by heat) is no sufficient, whereas charring is.

Question 72

What is the M'Naghten Rule? What is the Irresistible Impulse Test? What is the Durham Test? What is the MPC test?

Answer 72

Insanity defenses: - M'Nahten: D is entitled to acquittal if a disease of mind caused a defect of reason such that D lacked the ability to know wrongfulness of actions OR understand the nature and quality of their actions. - Irresistible Impulse Test: D is entitled to acquittal if, because of mental illness, they were unable to control their actions or conform their conduct to the law. - Durham Test: D is entitled to acquittal if the crime was the product of mental illness (only N. Hampshire). - MPC Test (modern trend): D is entitled to acquittal if D had mental disease or defect and, as a result, lacked substantial capacity to either appreciate the criminality of their conduct or conform to the law.

Question 73

What is Voluntary Intoxication?

Answer 73

Intoxication is voluntary if it is the result of the intentional taking without duress of a substance known to be intoxicating.

Question 74

What is Involuntary Intoxication? How can it be used as a defense?

Answer 74

Intoxication is involuntary only if it results from the taking of an intoxicating substance without knowledge of its nature, under direct duress imposed by another, or pursuant to medical advice while unaware of the substance’s intoxicating effect. - This is a defense to ALL crimes.

Question 75

What effect does voluntary intoxication have on crimes involving malice, negligence, or recklessness?

Answer 75

Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to crimes requiring malice, recklessness, or negligence. In the case of recklessness, if a defendant's lack of awareness results from voluntary intoxication, his conduct will nevertheless be deemed reckless.

Question 76

What is the Infancy Defense at common law?

Answer 76

- There is no criminal liability for those under the age of 7. - Ages 7-14, there's a rebuttable presumption that the child is unable to understand the wrongfulness of their acts. - 14+ = Treated as adult.

Question 77

What are the different rules for the Self-Defense defense?

Answer 77

- Rule for Non-Deadly Force: A person (1) without fault may use such force as that person (2) reasonably believes is necessary to protect themselves from imminent use of unlawful force. - Rule for Deadly Force: A person may use deadly force in self-defense if the person (1) is without fault, (2) is confronted with unlawful force, and (3) reasonably believes that they are threatened with imminent death or great bodily harm.

Question 78

What duty to retreat exists for self-defense purposes?

Answer 78

- Majority View (apply unless told otherwise): There is no duty to retreat. - Minority View: Retreat is required before using deadly force if D can safely do so UNLESS the attack occurs within D's home OR the attack occurs when D is making a lawful arrest OR the assailant is in process or robbing D.

Question 79

When can someone be justified in using force to defend others?

Answer 79

D can defend others if D reasonably believes that the person has the right to use force in their own defense. - Minority View: There must be some special relationship.

Question 80

What are the rules for the defense of a dwelling?

Answer 80

A person may use nondeadly force in defense of their dwelling when, and to the extent that, they reasonably believe that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate another’s unlawful entry 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 themself or another in the dwelling, or to prevent an entry to commit a felony in the dwelling.

Question 81

What is Duress in criminal law?

Answer 81

It is 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. Threats to harm a third person may also suffice to establish the defense of duress.

Question 82

What is the defense of Necessity in criminal law?

Answer 82

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 in the crime. The test is objective; a good faith belief is not sufficient.

Question 83

What relevance does a mistake or ignorance of fact have in providing a criminal defense?

Answer 83

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; thus, it is irrelevant if the crime imposes “strict” liability.

Question 84

What is Entrapment?

Answer 84

Entrapment occurs if the intent to commit the crime originated not with the defendant but with law enforcement officers. 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. - Merely providing the opportunity for a predisposed person to commit a crime is not entrapment.

Question 85

What is Perjury?

Answer 85

Perjury is the intentional taking of a false oath (lying) in regard to a material matter (that is, one that might affect the outcome of the proceeding) in a judicial proceeding.

Question 86

What is subornation of perjury?

Answer 86

Subornation of perjury consists of procuring or inducing another to commit perjury.

Question 87

What is Bribery?

Answer 87

- Bribery at common law was the corrupt payment or receipt of anything of value for official action. - Under modern statutes, it may be extended to nonpublic officials, and either the offering of a bribe or the taking of a bribe may constitute the crime.