Criminal law FINALS

Question 1

Larceny defined?

Answer 1

Trespassory taking, Asportation, PP of another, with intent to deprive.

Question 2

What elevates larceny to robbery?

Answer 2

Accomplished by force or fear

Question 3

Larceny by ________ is when someone uses deception to gain possession of another’s property without owners consent.

Answer 3

Trick

Question 4

T/F) Larceny can be satisfied by even the “slightest” change in position.

Answer 4

True. “Trespassory taking, asportation, personal property, with intent to deprive permanently.”

Question 5

What intent level is larceny?

Answer 5

Specific

Question 6

_____ pretenses: Acquiring title fraudently through false statements, past or present.

Answer 6

False pretenses

Question 7

______________: Lawful possession of property then coverted to own personal use.

Answer 7

Embezzlement

Question 8

Giving money to the bank teller for deposit, then teller keeps for her own use.

Answer 8

Embezzlement

Question 9

_______ is a rule that says if someone has possession of a bunch of things and takes some of them without opening the container, it’s theft but not larceny. However, if they break open the container and take some or all of the contents, it’s considered larceny.

Answer 9

Breaking the. bulk

Question 10

_____ ____ Doctrine example: Someone goes for joy ride, intending to abandon or never return. Then decides to keep.

This doctrine is helpful when trespass is ongoing and someone’s intent changes.

Answer 10

Continuing trespass Doctrine

Question 11

______: Victim has entrusted property to ∆ and the ∆ then converts property to his or her own use. [Bank Teller]

Answer 11

Embezzlement

Question 12

What is embezzlement known as in SC?

Answer 12

Breach of trust

Question 13

Receiving stolen property occurs when ∆:
(1)__________ &
(2) __________

Answer 13

(1) Receives possession &
(2) Control of property

“Possession/dominion and control”

Question 14

Difference between larceny and robbery?

Answer 14

Robbery is accomplished through force or fear.

Question 15

Is an object resembling a weapon sufficient to charge for armed robbery?

Answer 15

Yes.

Question 16

CL Burglary defined?
1.
2.
3.
4.

Answer 16

1. Breaking and entering
2. Dwelling of another
3. at nighttime
4. With intent to commit a felony [If misdemeanor, it is not burglary charge]

Question 17

Attempted is also known as _____ crimes.

Answer 17

Inchoate crimes

Question 18

__________: 2 or more persons who agree to work together to violate the law or do a lawful act in an unlawful manner.

Answer 18

Conspiracy

Question 19

Define conspiracy:
1.
2.
3.

Answer 19

1. Two or more persons, who [AR] agree…
2. To violate the law or
3. Do a lawful act in an unlawful manner [MR]

Question 20

What is the AR for conspiracy?

Answer 20

The act itself.

Question 21

Conspiracy is an… [K]

Answer 21

… illegal contract.

Question 22

T/F) To charge conspiracy, if you can show an agreement, even if it’s passive, that’s all you need.

Answer 22

True

Question 23

In addition to CL requirements for Conspiracy, under the FED statute, you must also plead what?

Answer 23

At least one OVERT act. Something done in “furtherance” of the conspiracy.

Question 24

What is an OVERT act? [FED Conspiracy]

Answer 24

Buying of guns and masks before an armed robbery. The buying of guns/masks would constitute the overt act.

Question 25

An ____ act is one done in the support or furtherance of the conspiracy itself.

Answer 25

Overt act

Question 26

T/F) Overt act MUST be pleaded in federal indictment for conspiracy.

Answer 26

True

Question 27

Is conspiracy a standalone chargeble offense?

Answer 27

Yes

Question 28

Conspiracy also can create VL. [T/F]

Answer 28

True

Question 29

_____ liability: You can be liable for the substantive crime done by someone else.

Answer 29

Vicarious liability

Question 30

______ or accessory liability is a theory of VL for substantive crimes.

Answer 30

Accomplice

Question 31

Is accomplice liability charged as an independent crime?

Answer 31

No.

Question 32

Why is accomplice liability not charged as indp. crime?

Answer 32

Its a theory of VL.

Question 33

The CL developed this to ensure we “get em all.”

Answer 33

Accomplice liability

Question 34

4 types of accomplices?

Answer 34

1. Principles in 1st degree
2. Principles in 2nd degree
3. Accessories b4 fact
4. Accessories after the fact

Question 35

AL: Principles in 1st degree?

Answer 35

The guy who went in with gun to rob bank.

Question 36

AL: Principles in 2nd degree?

Answer 36

Getaway driver

Question 37

Accessories b4 and after the fact require ____ intent.

Answer 37

Specific

Question 38

Accessory ______: Aided b4 the crime.

Answer 38

Accessory b4 fact

Question 39

Accessory _____ : The guy you junk the car to after robbery.

Answer 39

Accessory after fact

Question 40

Attempt at CL?
1.
2.

Answer 40

1. Specific intent to commit the crime
2. Acts done in furtherance of that intent

Question 41

MPC Criminal attempt?
A.
B.

Answer 41

A. Purposely engages in conduct that would constitute the crime – if AC are as he believes them to be.

B. Purposely does or omits to do anything that he believes constitutes a substantial step in commission of crime.

Question 42

MPC Criminal attempt, what is substantial step (C)?

Answer 42

Strongly corroborative of actor’s criminal purpose.

Question 43

MPC Crim. Attempt. Examples of substantial step?

Answer 43

• lying in wait
• unlawful entry
• possession of material employed in commission of crime
• etc.

Question 44

Abandonment is an affirmative defense to what?

Answer 44

Criminal Attempt

Question 45

A person is NOT guilty of attempt if:
(1)
(2)

Answer 45

(1) He abandons his effort to commit the crime AND

(2) His conduct manifests a complete renunciation of criminal purpose.

Question 46

An attempt to charge criminal crimes requires proof ‘BARD’ that the ∆ acted with the ____ intent to commit the crime.

Answer 46

Specific Intent

Question 47

MPC __________ : It is an affirmative ∆ to charges of criminal attempt, solicitation, or conspiracy, that the person prevented said charges UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES MANIFESTING A COMPLETE AND VOLUNTARY RENUNCIATION. [This is not a defense at CL]

Answer 47

MPC Renunciation defense

Question 48

Define MPC Renunciation:

Answer 48

An affirmative ∆ to criminal attempt, solicitation, conspiracy, whereas person successfully prevents commission of the offense manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation.

Question 49

T/F) To be considered ‘voluntary,’ the decision to ABANDON must originate with the ∆, not as a result of extrinsic factors.

Answer 49

True

Question 50

When can you use the affirmative defense [MPC] of Renunciation?

Answer 50

Only after the entire criminal attempt has occurred.

Question 51

T/F) B4 manifesting intent of abandonment, if his criminal endeavor was made in response to an extrinsic factor, not a product of his own volition, this does NOT constitute a legal ∆.

Answer 51

True

Question 52

_____________ For purpose of promoting or facilitating commission of a crime, he commands or encourages another person, to engage in specific conduct that would constitute such crime.

Answer 52

Solicitation

Question 53

Define Solicitation per the MPC.

Answer 53

1. For purposes of promoting or facilitating commission of a crime…
2. He commands or encourages another…
3. To engage in specific conduct constituting commission of such a crime.

Question 54

Is Renunciation a defense to Solicitation?

Answer 54

Yes. Valid ∆ to:
1. Criminal attempt
2. Solicitation
3. Conspiracy

Not valid at CL. Must be complete and voluntary.

Question 55

Does it matter that the actors doesn’t ‘communicate’ with the person he has solicited to commit the crime?

Answer 55

No. “It is immaterial that the actor fails to comm. with the person he solicits to commit a crime if his conduct was designed to effect such communication.”

Question 56

_______ Solicitation: It is immaterial that the actor fails to communicate with the person he solicits to commit a crime if his conduct was designed to effect such a communication.

Answer 56

Un-communicated Solicitation

Question 57

If a person tries to get another person [solicitation] to hire a hit man to commit murder, is that person guilty of solicitation of murder?

Answer 57

Yup.

Question 58

T/F) The crime of solicitation is complete as soon as you ask, even if the other person says no.

Answer 58

True

Question 59

Conspiracy is a standalone crime. What about attempt / solicitation?

Answer 59

No. They merge into the substantive crime.

Question 60

Does the federal drug conspiracy statute require pleading of an overt act?

Answer 60

No.

Question 62

T/F) CL attempt, you can’t renunciate. You are charged regardless.

Answer 62

True

Question 63

Can you charge more than one crime under conspiracy?

Answer 63

Yes! As long as they are the object of the “same agreement.”

Question 64

_____ rule: When the crime itself requires two persons [adultery, bribery, bigamy] you can’t charge conspiracy.

Answer 64

Wharton’s rule

Question 65

Federal conspiracy requires pleading at least one overt act in 22 statutes. Which one does not?

Answer 65

Drug conspiracy statute.

Question 66

Is being with someone when they committ a crime enough for conspiracy?

Answer 66

No. You have to know and you must do something to get involved.

Question 67

______ doctrine: also known as ____ liability is a legal principle that holds a conspirator responsible for crimes committed by their co-conspirators.

Answer 67

Pinkerton doctrine / liability

Question 68

To find guilt based on Pinkerton liability / doctrine, courts require co-conspirators offenses to have been:

1.
2.

Answer 68

1. Foreseeable, and; [Natural & probalbe]
2. in furtherance of conspiracy

Question 69

The _______doctrine allows a defendant to be found guilty of a crime they didn’t commit if they were part of a conspiracy to commit that crime. The doctrine applies to all members of a conspiracy, unless they took steps to disavow the conspiracy

Answer 69

Pinkerton

Question 70

Is the government required to charge conspiracy to invoke Pinkerton doctrine? Why?

Answer 70

No. It is a theory of VL for actions of co-conspirators.

Question 72

Under modern accomplice liability approach, the person is not guilty of “adiding and abetting,” the person is guilty of the crime for which she provided assistance. [T/F]

Answer 72

True

Question 73

Is mere presence at the scene of a crime sufficient to charge accomplice liability?

Answer 73

No.

Question 74

Under the modern approach for accomplice liability, if principle actor is acquitted, you can not be charged as well. [T/F]

Answer 74

False. That was the CL approach.

Question 75

T/F) For accomplice liability, you must have specific intent knowledge of the crime that is being committed.

Answer 75

True

Question 76

Accomplice liability requirements:

Answer 76

You intended to assist and “actively assisted” in the completion of crime.

Question 77

Do you have to be physically present at the scene for conspiracy?

Answer 77

No.

Question 78

When can you use deadly force in self defense?

Answer 78

When deadly force used on you is (1)Imminent or (2)Underway.

Question 79

Self defense actions must be (1) and (2).

Answer 79

1. Necessary
2. Proportional

Question 80

Self defense elements:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Answer 80

1. Threatened with imminent
2. unlawful
3. force
4. that could cause injury
5. rsble person believe cant be avodied without force
6. defends by use of rsble force
7. Did not start the situtation itself

Question 81

Define self defense

Answer 81

Threatened by imminent unlawful force, that could cause injury, that reasonable person could not avoid, uses reasonable force in defense, and did not start it.

Question 82

In a [Bilateral/Unilateral] jurisdiction, at least two people must actually agree on a criminal plan in order for a conspiracy to exist.

Answer 82

Bilateral Jurisdiction

Question 83

In a [unilateral/bilateral] conspiracy jurisdiction, the act of a single person who believes—rightly or wrongly—that he or she is agreeing with another person to commit a crime is sufficient to establish a conspiracy.

Answer 83

Unilateral Jurisdiction

Question 84

Under _________ Rule, two people may not be convicted of a conspiracy where each of them has agreed to commit a crime that necessarily requires the participation of both of them. Incest is just such a crime.

Answer 84

Whartons rule.

Question 85

What jurisdiction can get a conviction, circumnavigating the Wharton rule for conspiracy?

Answer 85

Unilateral Jurisdictions

Question 86

T/F) If Moe, Larry, and Curly conspire to rob 3 places. Are they charged for one overarching conspiracy or 3 sep. conspiracies?

Answer 86

One overarching.

Question 87

To establish the mens rea of conspiracy, the prosecutor must prove the an alleged conspirators’ intent to agree with another person to commit the crime, and the intent to….

IE: Staying away from apt example for bagging of cocaine. She stayed away [agreement] but did not have MR to commit the crime itself.

Answer 87

Commit the crime itself.

Question 88

Is planning a robbery and observing said bank enough to charge conspiracy?

Answer 88

Yes. The observation itself is an overt act and the “planning” is enough to satisfy agreement.

Question 89

Conspiracy AR =
Conspiracy MR =

Answer 89

AR = The agreement itself.
MR = Intended with each other to do a crime.

Question 90

T/F) Solicitation consisting only of obviously hollow threats, joking, or bragging is enough to charge.

Answer 90

False.

Question 91

T/F) Moreover and significantly, the crime of criminal solicitation exists whether or not the criminal act solicited actually took place or whether the person solicited took any steps to accomplish it.

Answer 91

True

Question 92

T/F) It is a valid defense to a charge of criminal solicitation that the person being solicited could not commit the crime for which he or she was solicited.

Answer 92

False

Question 93

What is a big requirement for CL larceny?

Answer 93

You must deprive permanently.

Question 94

T/F) The CL Larceny statute only applies to personal property.

Answer 94

True

Question 95

T/F) At common law, lost property that clearly belonged to someone else was treated as if its owner was still in possession of it. A person who found lost property and took it, intending to keep it rather than to try to return it to its owner, was therefore guilty of larceny.

Answer 95

True

Question 96

If you find lost property and keep it… is this Larceny in CL J?

Answer 96

Yuppers.

Question 97

(MPC) ________ theft offense: If the prosecution prosecutes a person for one type of included theft offense but the evidence at trial establishes the commission instead of a different type of included theft offense, the accused is still guilty of theft under the statute.

Answer 97

Consolidated theft offense

Question 98

Attempt:
To charge CL =
To charge MPC =

Answer 98

CL = Prove specific intent for the crime intended.
MPC = Prove “substantial step” taken in furtherance of the crime

Question 99

T/F) A person cannot be convicted of an attempt offense entirely on the basis of his or her thinking about or decision to commit that crime.

What is required?

Answer 99

1. True
2. Proof of the AR element of attempt requires the prosecution to establish BARD that the accused went farther than simply engaging in “mere preparation” to commit a crime.

Question 100

What is the “minoriity” test for attempt?

Answer 100

Proximity test. IE: How close did the actor come to committing the charged crime?

Question 101

Attempt:
“In a majority of jurisdictions, the MPC test applies, and the prosecution must prove that the accused took _________________ in a course of conduct planned to culminate in . . . commission of the crime.”

Answer 101

Substantial step.

Question 102

The mens rea of any attempt crime is the defendant’s intent to……. that was the alleged criminal objective of the attempt.

Answer 102

… Commit the specific crime that has been charged.

Question 103

Attempt:
“And in minority jurisdictions which use some form of _______ test (how close did the actor come to completing the crime?”

Answer 103

Minority Js use the Proximity test = How close did actor come to completing the crime?

Question 104

“Attempted” involuntary manslaughter is a chargeable offense. [T/F]

Answer 104

False. Trick Q.

Question 105

To establish the defense of “Abandonment,” the accused must show that their abandonment was….

Answer 105

Voluntary. IE: Not influenced by extrinsic factors.

Question 106

Even in a jurisdiction that uses the retreat doctrine, there is an exception to that rule when the person using defensive deadly force is acting in his or her own home. In that case, such a person does not have an obligation to retreat. [T/F]

Answer 106

True. This is known as the “Castle doctrine” exception to the duty to retreat rule.

Question 107

Exception to the castle doctrine?

Answer 107

Co-Inhabitants. In this case, IE: Hubby and wife, you should try to retreat first.

Question 108

If shooter has gun on wife, and you kill in a J where there is a duty to retreat. what is your duty?

Answer 108

Only to retreat if the wife can retreat. If she cannot, then you don’t have to.

Question 109

T/F) In most jurisdictions, the use of non-deadly force is held to be lawful when the person using it reasonably believes that it is necessary to use it to prevent or terminate an unlawful trespass or the unlawful carrying away of that person’s property.

Answer 109

True

Question 110

What is the standard applied to self-defense arguments?

Answer 110

Reasonable person standard

Question 111

Self defense: Reasonable person standard is an [objective/subjective] standard.

Answer 111

Objective

Question 112

T/F] The American CL did not have a duty to retreat. This is the majority rule today in most Js.

Answer 112

True

Question 113

The English CL does have a duty to retreat and we have adopted this in a minority of Jurisdictions. [T/F]

Answer 113

True

Question 114

_____ Doctrine: You don’t have a duty to retreat from your home.

Answer 114

Castle Doctrine

Question 115

Co-workers do not have a duty to retreat. [T/F]

Answer 115

True. Both entitled to be on the job.

Question 116

___ ___ rule: If you interfere in someone else’s fight, you have the same/no more rights than your partner would have.

Answer 116

Alter-ego rule

Question 117

Under the alter ego rule, if husband was initial aggressor, wife is too. [T/F]

Answer 117

True

Question 118

When you came upon the fight, how would a reasonable person have viewed this? [ ___ ___ standard]

Answer 118

Reasonable belief/person standard

Question 119

T/F] When tussling with someone over property, you have no duty to let it go. This may even shift over into self-defense scenario.

Answer 119

True

Question 120

What is the general rule for defense of property?

Answer 120

No deadly force. You can defend property though.

Question 121

To be convicted as accessories, it must be proved that each person…

Answer 121

1. Each of them actually intended to assist another person in committing this particular crime and intended.
2. That that person actually commit that crime.

Question 122

Define CL homicide

Answer 122

An unlawful killing of a human being

Question 123

Define murder at CL

Answer 123

An unlawful killing of a human being with malice afterthought

Question 124

Define CL manslaughter:

Answer 124

An unlawful killing of a human being without malice afterthought

Question 125

CL murder malice requirements:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Answer 125

1. Intentional killing
2. Intentional beating
3. Depraved heart
4. Felony murder

Question 126

How is CL murder reduced to VMS?

Answer 126

Reasonably provoked into HOP killing without sufficient cooling off time. [Where a reasonable person would not have cooled off]

Question 127

[VMS] HOP is _____ standard.

Answer 127

Subjective standard

Question 128

[Sentencing]
1. CL murder
2. VMS
3. IVMS

Answer 128

1. 30+
2. 5-30
3. 0-5

Question 129

In most jurisdictions, IVMS is one done in ____ or ___ negligence.

Answer 129

Gross or Criminal negligence = IVMS

Question 130

Define IVMS

Answer 130

Unintentional killing of a human being while committing negligent or unlawful act.

Question 131

MPC Purposefully

Answer 131

If an element involves the nature of his conduct or result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in such conduct or cause such a result.

If an element involves AC, he is aware of them or hope they exist.

Question 132

MPC knowingly

Answer 132

If an element involves nature of his conduct or attendent circumstances, he is aware his conduct is such or such circumstances exist.

If an element involves result of his conduct he is “practically certain” his conduct will cause such result.

Question 133

MPC recklessly

Answer 133

Acts recklessly when he “consciously disregards” a substantial and unjustifiable risk that an element exist.

Such disregard is a gross deviations from the acts of a law abiding citizen.

Question 134

MPC negligently:

Answer 134

A person acts negligently when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that an element exists.

Such failure is a gross deviation from acts of reasonable average person.

Question 135

T/F) An accomplice to a crime can be convicted of that crime simply by proving that she was an accomplice, regardless of what has happened—if anything—to the principal actor, even if principal actor was acquitted.

Answer 135

True

Question 136

2 Causation types?

Answer 136

1. But for
2. Proximate [actual]

Question 137

What does the government have to prove when charging “known legal duty MR?”

Answer 137

1. he knew the law
2. he broke it anyways
   `

Question 138

____ _____ is the highest possible MR, even about purpose and knowledge.

Answer 138

Known legal duty

Question 139

T/F) For murder in many jurisdictions, malice can be implied from the accused’s act of gross recklessness [because murder is general intent] or actions undertaken with extreme indifference to the value of human life.

Answer 139

True

Question 140

In MPC, 1st degree murder requires what?

Answer 140

Malice, premeditation, deliberation.

Question 141

[1st degree murder MPC] T/F) Malice is often presumed where a person has killed another person by using a deadly weapon, e.g. a gun or a knife, on a vital part of the victim’s body. IE: It doesn’t matter if they actually had malice if deadly weapon is used in MPC.

Answer 141

True

Question 142

Mistake of fact and law are ______ ∆s.

Answer 142

Affirmative ∆s

Question 143

Activity like making drugs or food can cause serious harm to the public. If not done properly, can cause extreme health issues.
No MR required to charge.

Answer 143

Public Welfare offenses

Question 144

Legislatures have enacted laws that imposes criminal punishment when the violation involves protection of the public welfare without requiring proof of defendant’s intent.

Answer 144

Public welfare offenses

Question 145

Court says when you have to prove intent, if you have taken steps to not know what is happening, that is willful blindness the gov. can charge. Also called ostrich charge. So what do you charge?

Answer 145

Willful blindness = Knowingly.
“You took steps not to know”

Question 146

T/F) if not clear from the statute and there is a MR mentioned for at least one element, we then assume that MR element applies to all.

Answer 146

True

Question 147

If statute silent on MR?

Answer 147

Charge knowingly

Question 148

Willful language means what?

Answer 148

Knowingly

Question 149

CL general intent is what in the MPC?

Answer 149

Recklessness
Negligence

Question 150

CL Intent:
The lowest level of intent, requiring proof that ∆ engaged consciously in the act but the government need NOT prove that the ∆ sought a particular result or was fully conscious that he was committing a crime.

Answer 150

General

Question 151

CL Intent:
The highest level of intent, requiring proof that the ∆ had a particular state of mind involved in the commission of the offense.

Answer 151

Specific

Question 152

CL Intent [MR] categories?

Answer 152

Specific and General

Question 153

Punishment for conduct of someone who fails to assist another in need when there is no appreciable risk to them. What law?

Answer 153

Good Samaritan laws

Question 154

When can inaction, IE: the omission of AR, be grounds for criminal liability?

Answer 154

When there was a duty to act. Moral obligations, guardians, Good Samaritan laws

Question 155

Do all 4 elements of a crime need to be concurrent?

Answer 155

Yes!

Question 156

4 elements of crime?

Answer 156

1. MR
2. AR
3. Attendant Circumstances
4. Causation

Question 157

Is unconsciousness a complete defense?

Answer 157

Only when not self induced

Question 158

Must AR be voluntary?

Answer 158

yes!

Question 159

_____ Doctrine: Statute is void for ____ when the statute does not clearly put person on notice.

Answer 159

Vagueness Doctrine

Question 160

Rule of ____: If there is general ambiguity, this rule says we use interpretation that is narrower, not broader. This is to the advantage of the accused.

Answer 160

Rule of Lenity

Question 161

____ _____ Rule: “If a statute language is clear & unambiguous, statute’s ____ _____ will govern. If it is NOT clear, courts then turn to legislative history for guidance.”

Answer 161

Plain meaning rule

Question 162

If the evidence is weaker than anticipated, can the state pivot and charge the jury on lesser offenses?

Answer 162

Yes!

Question 163

T/F) Lesser included offenses have less elements but the elements they do have come from the larger offenses.

Answer 163

True

Question 164

To establish that a person committed a crime, must every element of it be established / proven BARD?

Answer 164

Yes!

Question 165

At the end of arguments, judge charges jury with the law. If he does so incorrectly?

Answer 165

Grounds for new trial

Question 166

[AR]

If ∆ was aware that he suffered from this sleep disorder and that sleepwalking and other bodily movements could occur as a result and he was in a position to do something about that, e.g. through taking appropriate medication, but did not, a voluntary act may be established.

Answer 166

True!

Question 167

[Causation]

T/F) More than one person can be the actual (or “but for”) cause of the same criminal result, even if they act independently.

Answer 167

True

Question 168

[Causation]

T/F) Mere negligent medical treatment leading to the death of a victim who was hospitalized as the result of a prior criminal assault has been held not to break the causal chain with respect to the perpetrator of the assault.

Answer 168

True

Question 169

[Conspiracy]

T/F) A co-conspirator does not need to know precisely who his or her co-conspirators are in order for a conspiracy to exist with them included.

Answer 169

True

Question 170

[Solicitation]

T/F) A person’s actions are not the crime of solicitation where they consists only of obviously hollow threats, joking, or bragging.

Answer 170

True

Question 171

[Murder and malice]

T/F) In many jurisdictions, it can be implied from the accused’s act of gross recklessness or actions undertaken with extreme indifference to the value of human life.

Answer 171

True

Question 172

If an accused person shows that his or her actions were “involuntary,” no crime has been made out. T/F

Answer 172

True!

Question 173

[Accomplice liability]

The majority rule is that an accomplice may not renounce his criminal intention after a criminal act has already taken place. In this instance, David’s act of complicity had already occurred. [Bank robbery planning. He helped plan then renounced.]

T/F

Answer 173

True

Question 174

What is the majority rule for accomplice liability?

Answer 174

∆ may not renounce his acts AFTER he has already done them.

Question 175

[Attempt]

A person can be convicted of an attempt offense entirely on the basis of his or her thinking about or decision to commit that crime. (T/F)

Answer 175

False.

Question 176

[Attempt]

T/F Proof of the actus reus element of attempt requires the prosecution to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused went farther than simply engaging in “mere preparation” to commit a crime.

Answer 176

True.
Majority = Substantial step
Minority = Proximity

Question 177

[Attempt]

How can prosecution prove that ∆ completed the AR element of attempt BARD?

Answer 177

Actions that constitute a “substantial step” in the commission of the crime.

Question 178

[Attempt]
Buying a weapon to use in a robbery constitutes a ___ ___ in the commission of a crime.

Answer 178

Substantial step

Question 179

Under the Model Penal Code, a ∆ commits an attempt if he or she performs an act that….

Answer 179

….under the circumstances as he[/she] believes them to be,” constitutes a substantial step toward commission of a crime.

Question 180

[Attempt]

T/F] Purchasing a gun is a “substantial step” in the commission of a crime.

Answer 180

True!

Question 181

[Attempt]

In a minority of jurisdictions, various forms of ___ _____ are used instead of the Model Penal Code approach to assess the existence of the actus reus of attempt.

Answer 181

Proximity tests

Question 182

2 approaches to entrapment?

Answer 182

1. Subjective
2. Objective

Question 183

Subjective view of entrapment focuses on what?

Answer 183

The ∆. Asks if this person is predisposed to do what the alleged crime was?

Question 184

The subjective/objective approach to entrapment is the dominant rule in FED court and most states.

Answer 184

Subjective rule

Question 185

The _____ approach to entrapment is a legal standard that judges whether a defendant was predisposed to commit a crime before law enforcement intervened. This defense is the appropriate remedy where there is a good faith basis to assert that the accused lacked predisposition to commit the offense in question.

Answer 185

Subjective. Dominant approach.

Question 186

The ________ approach focuses on the defendant’s individual circumstances, and provides a defense if law enforcement pressured the defendant to commit a crime against their will.

Answer 186

Subjective

Question 187

T/F) The subjective approach to Entrapment provides a defense if LE goes too far and pressures ∆ to commit the crime against their will.

Answer 187

True

Question 188

T/F) If a law-abiding citizen is approached by a prostitute and agrees to have sex with her, the citizen might not be able to use an entrapment defense because they readily agreed to commit the crime.

Answer 188

True

Question 189

[Attempt]
In a majority of jurisdictions, the MPC requires the prosecution must prove that the accused took a _____ _____ in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of the crime.

Answer 189

Substantial step

Question 190

[Attempt]
In a minority jurisdictions, which use some form of proximity test, which means what?

Answer 190

How close did the actor come to completing the crime?

Question 191

[Attempt]
2 tests?

Answer 191

MPC = Substantial step
Minority Js = Proximity

Question 192

[Attempt]
The mens rea of any attempt crime is…

Answer 192

∆s intent to commit the charged crime

Question 193

T/F) There is no abandonment defense to a criminal act which has already been completed. IE: You stole a purse, then returned it later.

Answer 193

True. Abandonment ∆ can be raised if you abandoned your actions b4 crime was completed.

Question 194

T/F) An apparent abandonment by an accused is not voluntary, however, if it is motivated, in whole or in part, by circumstances that were not present or apparent at the beginning of the course of conduct that increase the probability of detection or apprehension or make it more difficult to accomplish.

Answer 194

True. Abandonment must be voluntary and not influenced by extrinsic factors.

Question 195

The AR of __________ is the act of commanding, encouraging, or requesting another person to commit a particular crime, prostitution in this case.

Answer 195

Solicitation

Question 196

In a majority of jurisdictions, a death occurring when an accused person is committing, attempting to commit, or fleeing after committing a felony is deemed to be the crime of _____ murder.

Answer 196

Felony murder

Question 197

[Felony murder]
In most jurisdictions, it applies only to a specified list of serious or _______ felonies. In other jurisdictions, it applies to a death occurring during the commission of any felony deemed to be ___ ____ to human life.

Answer 197

1. Majority = Serious [triggering] felonies
2. Minority = Inherently dangerous

Question 198

[Felony murder]
In most Js, the death must be ____ related to the felony.

Answer 198

Casually

Question 199

[Felony murder]
T/F) In addition, the felony murder requirement applies only to a victim’s death that occurs during the commission of the triggering felony.

Answer 199

True

Question 200

[Felony murder]
Felony = Armed bank robbery
Facts = Arrested two days later. Car chase pursues killing civilian.
Charge = Felony murder

Valid?

Answer 200

No. 2 days later is probably too long. The commission of the felony is complete and purps have reached a “safe haven.”

Question 201

The MR showing required for INVMS is commonly ______ negligence. This is an objective element which is satisfied when the accused should have been aware of a ____ and _____ risk that death or serious bodily injury might occur as a result of his actions.

Answer 201

1. Gross negligence
2. Substantial and unjustifiable risk

“∆ failed to recognize a substantial and unjustifiable risk that equates to a gross deviation of actions of a RAP.”

Question 202

1st degree murder requires?
1.
2.
3.

Answer 202

1. Malice
2. Premeditation
3. Deliberation

Question 203

The _______ entrapment ∆ focuses on behavior of law enforcement, rather than the ∆s predisposition to commit a crime. Criminal record not admissible.

Answer 203

Objective entrapment

Question 204

______ entrapment [Dominate rule] focuses on the ∆s predisposition.

Answer 204

Subjective entrapment

Question 205

[Entrapment]
The _________ approach focuses on the defendant’s individual circumstances, and provides a defense if law enforcement pressured the defendant to commit a crime against their will. IE: ∆ was NOT predisposed.

Answer 205

Subjective. This is the dominant rule.

Question 206

The ________ entrapment defense focuses on the defendant’s predisposition to commit the crime, and the defendant’s criminal record is admissible to prove this.

Answer 206

Subjective

Question 207

[Entrapment]
The minority rule checks if the government’s actions were so bad that they would make a person who DIDN’T want to, do something illegal.

Answer 207

Objective. We are looking to see if LE behavior is “sufficiently outrageous.”

Question 208

[Entrapment]
Under a__________ approach, the focus is on whether the police used persuasive tactics to induce the defendant to commit a crime they were not already inclined to do.

Answer 208

Subjective

Question 209

T/F) Competency is not really a ∆ to a crime. This is addressed before trial.

Answer 209

True. If your incompetent you cant be tried in first place.

Question 210

Competency is not about the crime, it’s about what?

Answer 210

If you understand the trial process itself. Are you competent to stand trial?

Question 211

Who decides competency in a hearing before the trial?

Answer 211

Judge. Subject to abuse of discretion.

Question 212

Can anyone make a motion for competency?

Answer 212

Yup

Question 213

Insanity is about the crime. Competency is about the trial. T/F

Answer 213

True!

Question 214

If you are found incompetent to stand trial? You get off scott free?

Answer 214

Civil commitment bucko.

Question 215

4 different insanity defenses?

Answer 215

1. M’Naghten rule [Majority]
2. Irresistible Impulse test
3. Durham test [but for insanity, would not have happened]
4. MPC: Suffered from insanity at time of crime and unable to conform to the law.

Question 216

[Insanity]
______ rule:

(1) Purely cognitive test. At the time of crime, when you pulled trigger, were you insane? Couldn’t understand nature of actions.

(2) Moral test. If you did understand, you didnt understand moral consequences.

Answer 216

M’Naghten Rule

Question 217

[Insanity]
______ rule: Under this rule, you are “insane” if you are incapable of knowing the difference between legal and moral right or wrong.

Answer 217

M’Naghten rule. Hardest rule. Majority / MPC. Looks at your actions when you pulled the trigger.

Question 218

[Insanity]
_________ test is the most liberal. States ∆ is not responsible if their act was result of mental defect or disease. IE: If you have a mental defect, not responsible.

Answer 218

Durham test

Question 219

Duress is not a good defense to murder charge because actions undertaken in response to a threat never justify an act of homicide. T/F

Answer 219

True. Duress is normally a good ∆, just not for murder.

Question 220

Two prongs of the MN insanity test?

Answer 220

1. Nature/Quality of her act [Did you know what you were doing? IE: Pointing gun at 2 kids?]
2. Moral incapacity [If you did know nature of your actions, did you understand the consequences?]

Question 221

The actus reus of conspiracy is an __________ between one or more persons to commit a criminal act or to use criminal means to commit a lawful act.

Answer 221

Agreement

Question 222

What is the AR for conspiracy ?

Answer 222

The agreement itself

Question 223

What is the MR for conspiracy?

Answer 223

That purps intended to agree with one another to commit the crime, and that they intended to commit the crime itself.

Question 224

In a _________ jurisdiction, at least two people must actually agree on a criminal plan in order for a conspiracy to exist.

Answer 224

Bilateral. You can’t charge here if one did not agree to the conspiracy.

Question 225

However, a majority of jurisdictions that criminalize criminal conspiracies today follow the Model Penal Code approach to conspiracy law and permit conviction of a criminal defendant for a “unilateral” conspiracy. [T/F]

Answer 225

True

Question 226

The Model Penal Code (MPC) uses a _________ approach to conspiracy: only one person needs to have a guilty mind to be convicted.

__________ approach
A defendant can be convicted of conspiracy if they agree to participate in a crime, even if no other person is involved.
___________ act
In addition to agreeing to commit a crime, at least one person involved in the conspiracy must take an action to further the illegal goal.

Answer 226

Unilateral
Overt act

Question 227

The actus reus of conspiracy…..

Answer 227

Is the agreement to complete the specified crime.

Question 228

If charged crime requires two ppl to even complete the crime, what rule should you be aware of when charging conspiracy in a minority rule J?

Answer 228

Whartons rule. If in majority J [Unilateral] then it don’t matter.

Question 229

Culpability of an accessory no longer turns on whether a principal has been convicted previously of the same crime. An accomplice to a crime can be convicted of that crime simply by proving that she was an accomplice, regardless of what has happened—if anything—to the principal. [T/F]

Answer 229

True

Question 230

Malice is often presumed where a person has killed another person by using a deadly weapon, e.g. a gun or a knife, on a vital part of the victim’s body. [T/F]

Answer 230

True

Question 231

To charge possession of controlled substance what must prosecution show?

Answer 231

The prosecution must prove that the accused was [AWARE] of his or her possession of a contraband item to a degree sufficient to be able to exercise [control] over it, and that he or she acted knowingly and voluntarily in [possessing] it.

“Dominion & Control”

Question 232

The fact that there was cocaine in ∆s car can establish culpability in and of itself. (T/F)

Answer 232

False. Must have [knowledge] sufficient to exercise control and possession over it.

Question 233

What must be shown for causation?
1.
2.

Answer 233

1. Actual cause [but for cause]
2. Legally sufficient cause [proximate]

Question 234

[Causation]
CL uses what time period to find causation for death of another?

Answer 234

1 yr 1 day [Minority rule]

Question 235

[Accomplice]
A person can be found guilty of a crime simply because he or she aided someone else in the commission of that crime. However, to establish such complicity, the accused must have….

Answer 235

… must have actively assisted the other person in the crime.

Question 236

[Accomplice]
Is mere presence at the scene enough?

Answer 236

No. ∆ must have actively assisted the other person in the completion of the crime.

Question 237

[Attempt]
1. Majority approach?
2. Minority approach?

Answer 237

1. Substantial step
2. Proximity test [How close did you get]

Question 238

[Conspiracy]
In a majority of jurisdictions, the existence of a criminal conspiracy also requires proof of the commission by at least one of the co-conspirators of an ____ ____ tending to demonstrate the seriousness of the conspirators’ purpose.

Answer 238

Overt act.

Question 239

1. For conspiracy you need to show an ___ act.
2. For attempt you need to show a ____ step was taken.

Answer 239

1. Overt act
2. Substantial step

Question 240

Does Larceny apply to “theft of services?”

Answer 240

No. Larceny only applies to personal property. “Wrongful taking of PP, asportation, permanently with intent to deprive.”

Question 241

A person who found lost property and took it, intending to keep it rather than to try to return it to its owner, was therefore guilty of larceny. [T/F]

Answer 241

True!

Question 242

When prosecution prosecutes a person for one type of included theft offense but the evidence at trial establishes the commission instead of a different type of included theft offense, the accused is still guilty of theft under a consolidated statute. [T/F]

Two of the most common types of included theft offense are the two at issue in the present circumstances: theft by unlawful taking and receiving stolen property.

Answer 242

True. Consolidated theft. This is relevant when someone received stolen property and they knew it. Maybe you cant prove they stole it, but if you can prove they received it, thats enough.

Question 243

[Excuses]
MN Test?
1.
2.

Answer 243

1. Suffering from such a mental disease or defect as not to know the [nature and quality] of the act he committed or,
2. if he did know, that he did not know that what he was doing was [wrong.]

Question 244

[Insanity ∆]

1. Suffering from mental disease such as to not understand [nature & quality] of the act he committed.
2. or if he did understand, he didn’t understand that what he was doing was [wrong.] — as referred to as moral incapacity test.

Answer 244

MN Test for insanity ∆

Question 245

Which prong of MN test is the moral incapacity test?

Answer 245

2.

1. Understand nature of actions
2. If understanding, does not understand why his actions morally wrong.

Question 246

π has to establish that Livonia was suffering from such a mental disease or defect as not to know the nature and quality of the act she committed or, if she did know, that she did not know that what she was doing was wrong. [What test is this referring to?]

Answer 246

MN Test

Question 247

[Defense]

“[Duress is a complete defense.] It may be used as a defense to a criminal charge when an accused person has been coerced by another person’s unlawful threats into committing a crime because he or she reasonably believed that the other person would subject him or her or a third party to death or serious injury imminently if he or she did not commit that crime.” [T/F]

Answer 247

True

Question 248

MPC insanity defense requirements?
1.
2.

Answer 248

1. At time of killing, suffering disease [Lacked capacity]
2. Lacked capacity to appreciate wrongfulness of actions / cant conform to law

Question 249

[Entrapment]
T/F) Proof of an accused person’s entrapment by the government is a complete defense to criminal charges.

Answer 249

True!

Question 250

[Entrapment]
FED courts and some states use what test?

Answer 250

Subjective

Question 251

[Entrapment]
The ________ test focuses on the government rather than on the accused. It asks whether the government agents involved in the transaction encouraged or assisted the accused in committing the crime charged in an [outrageous] fashion.

Answer 251

Objective

Question 252

[Entrapment]
This is a test which asks whether the accused was predisposed to commit the crime charged, i.e. it focuses on the accused person’s subjective state of mind.

Answer 252

Subjective. If predisposed, it is not entrapment. [Dateline]

Question 253

[Entrapment]
T/F) “Under either test, a law enforcement agent’s act of merely giving the accused the opportunity to commit a crime is not enough, in and of itself, to establish entrapment. “

Answer 253

True!

Question 254

[Entrapment]
Under the objective test, what is the jury looking at?

Answer 254

Looking to see if governments actions were “sufficiently outreagous.”

Question 255

[Entrapment]
Subjective test is also known as the _____ test. It is majority rule. (Going fishing)

Answer 255

Jacobson test.

Question 256

[Entrapment]
Objective test is the [majority/minority] rule. (Fishing w/ dynamite)

Answer 256

Minority rule.

Question 257

If LE merely gives you the opportunity to do something bad, something you already have inclination to do, is that entrapment?

Answer 257

No. That’s fishing.

Question 258

Example of proper entrapment?

Answer 258

Dateline. ∆ was already predisposed to do the crime and LE simply gave them opportunity to do it.

Question 259

T/F) If you are predisposed to do the crime, not entrapment!

Answer 259

True

Question 260

[Entrapment, subjective]

If police CREATE the predisposition (you were not predisposed on your own), is this entrapment?

Answer 260

Yes.

Question 261

Prior inclination = not entrapment (T/F)

Answer 261

True

Question 262

What is the objective test for entrapment looking at?

Answer 262

Did police solicitation rise to the level of “outrageous” conduct whereas they just kept hammering away at you.

Question 263

Objective entrapment test looks for ____ ___ by the police.

Answer 263

Outrageous conduct

Question 264

[Intoxication]
Voluntary is a valid excuse. [T/F]

Answer 264

False.

Question 265

[Intoxication]
Minors don’t voluntarily take anything. (T/F)

Answer 265

True

Question 266

[Intoxication]
To raise a valid defense, you must show that the intoxication was involuntary.

Answer 266

True

Question 267

[Intoxication]
Not so much a traditional ∆ as it is a way of showing that you lacked the ____ to satisfy the charged crime.

Answer 267

Mens Rea

Question 268

The defense of necessity cannot be used to justify killing someone, unless it was done….

Answer 268

In self defense

Question 269

Is necessity a defense to murder?

Answer 269

No, unless done in self defense.

Question 270

T/F) Killing someone to save your own life – eating them– is still murder.

Answer 270

True

Question 271

Which is a valid defense to murder?
1. Necessity
2. Duress

Answer 271

Neither.

Question 272

3 theories of CL punishment?

Answer 272

1. Retributive
2. Restorative
3. Utilitarianism

Question 273

_____ theory punishes wrongdoers “because they deserve it.” [Hell yea]

Answer 273

Retributive

Question 274

_________ theory seeks to create the greatest benefit to society by [deterring crime] and rehabilitating criminals.

Answer 274

Utilitarianism

Question 275

This theory says we lock people up for their crime as a deterrent for others.

Answer 275

Utalitarianism

Question 276

Laws in at least 28 states and Puerto Rico allow that there is no duty to retreat an attacker in any place in which one is lawfully present. [T/F]

Answer 276

True. Majority of Js do not have a duty to retreat for self-defense.

Question 277

Duty to retreat. Majority or minority rule.

Answer 277

Minority. Most states have “stand your ground laws” and allow you to meet “force with force.”

Question 278

What is the MOST important element of self defense?

Answer 278

You are not the initial aggressor.

Question 279

CL murder malice:
1
2
3
4

Answer 279

1. Intentional killing
2. Intentional beating [grievous bodily injury]
3. Felony murder
4. Depraved/Malignant heart [recklessness]

Question 280

What CL intent is needed for CL Murder?

Answer 280

Specific Intent. This language is similar to purpose or knowledge for MPC. At CL they did not distinguish between the two.

Question 281

INVMS is someone dying from your ___ or ___ negligence.

Answer 281

Criminal / gross negligence.
This is also misdemeanor murder.

Question 282

When charging CL murder in essay?

Answer 282

1. Argue the intent [Including forethought]
2. Charge every malice element you can argue.

*Don’t need premeditation or deliberation at CL. Just need forethought + Specific intent + Malice.

Question 283

You don’t need premeditation or deliberation at CL murder. You only need….

Answer 283

Specific intent at time killing blow is struck. This satisfies forethought requirement.

Question 284

7 elements of self defense?

Answer 284

1. Threatened by imminent
2. Unlawful
3. Force
4. that will injure
5. Rsble person could not avoid
6. responds with rsble force
7. did not provoke

Question 285

What is the biggest factor for consideration in self defense?

Answer 285

Who was the initial aggressor? Jury needs to find that out.

Question 286

What is the general rule if you were the initial aggressor?

Answer 286

You don’t get to claim self defense

Question 287

Self defense must be ___ and ___

Answer 287

Necessary (reasonable) and proportional.

Question 288

__ __ rule: You have no more rights to self ∆ than the person whose aid your coming to. IE: If they were initial aggressor, you are too.

Answer 288

Alter ego / “At your peril” rule

Question 289

If the judge focuses upon the rationale of __________ deterrence in deciding on an appropriate sentence for π, she will be most concerned about ensuring that other people in π’s specific situation do not engage in criminal conduct like π in the future.

Answer 289

General deterrence which stems from Unitalitarianism.

Question 290

Moreover, to be convicted as an accessory, an accused must also have ___ ____ another person in the commission of a crime.

Answer 290

Actively assisted

Question 291

To charge accomplice liability?
1.
2.

Answer 291

1. Intend to assist as accomplice &
2. Actively assist

Question 292

[Attempt]
Majority: Per the MPC, prosecution must prove that the accused took a ___ ___ in a course of conduct planned to culminate in . . . commission of the crime.

Minority:

Answer 292

1. Majority = Substantial step
2. Minority = Proximity test. How close did ∆ get?

Question 293

[Attempt]
The mens rea of any attempt crime is the….

Answer 293

…defendant’s intent to commit the specific crime that was the alleged criminal objective of the attempt.

Question 294

2 tests for charging criminal attempt?

Answer 294

1. Substantial step [majority]
2. Proximity [minority]

Question 295

T/F) In many jurisdictions, malice can be implied from the accused’s act of gross recklessness or actions undertaken with extreme indifference to the value of human life.

Answer 295

True

Question 296

[Conspiracy]
Can the overt act of one be applied to all?

Answer 296

Yes!

Question 297

[Theft]
You received [knowingly] stolen goods from Damien and sold them for profit. How can prosecutor get you for theft?

Answer 297

Consolidated theft charge

Question 298

Define MPC Criminal attempt.

Answer 298

Person purposefully engages in conduct that constitutes a substantial step in commission of crime if attendant circumstances are as he believes them to be.

Question 299

Define MPC Solicitation.

Answer 299

Person promotes or facilitates commission of crime by commanding or encouraging another to engage in conduct constituting the crime.

Question 300

Define MPC conspiracy.

Answer 300

Two or more persons engage in unlawful conduct or complete a lawful act in an unlawful manner.

Question 301

How to get around the Wharton rule for conspiracy?

Answer 301

Uni-lateral J can still charge.

Question 302

Attempt =
Conspiracy =
Accomplice =

Answer 302

Attempt = substantial step needed
Conspiracy = one Overt act needed
Accomplice = actively assisted

Question 303

Accomplice liability?
1.
2.

Answer 303

1. Intent to assist in specified crime
2. Actively assisted

Question 304

Malice is presumed when? Implied when?

Answer 304

Presumed = use of gun or weapon
Implied = gross recklessness

Question 305

Strict liability crimes negate what? [MR/AR]

Answer 305

MR

Question 306

General deterrence is for deterring who?

Answer 306

Other people. Specific deterrence is for deterring the criminal.

Question 307

Define larceny.

Answer 307

Unlawful taking, asportation, personal property, intending to permanently deprive.

Question 308

MPC Criminal attempt:
Majority =
Minority =

“Substantial step” =

Answer 308

Majority = Substantial step
Minority = Proximity

SS = Strongly corobative of criminal behavior.

Question 309

T/F) Most jurisdictions do not permit an actor to use the duress or necessity defense to justify the killing of another person, even when it was necessary for the actor to do so to save his or her—or other persons’—lives.

Answer 309

True

Question 310

MN Test?
(A)
(B)

Answer 310

(A) Cognitive prong: Does not understand nature of actions.

(B) Moral prong: If understands actions, does not understand moral consequences of actions.

Question 311

MPC Insanity justification defense?

Answer 311

At time of killing, mental disease prevented ∆ from appreciating his actions and he cannot conform actions to the law.

Question 312

T/F) In order to use deadly force in self defense, a person must be responding to the use of deadly force against himself or herself.

Answer 312

True. In self-defense scenarios, you may only use that force which is necessary & proportional. “Meet in kind”

Question 313

When an initial aggressor who has used non-deadly force is faced with deadly force in response, he or she regains the right to respond defensively to that excessive forcible response. [T/F]

Answer 313

True

Question 314

T/F) However, in most jurisdictions that apply the retreat doctrine, there is an exception to the castle doctrine. The no-retreat-in-the-home rule does not typically apply in those situations where the person seeking to use force in his or her home intends to use it against a co-habitant.

Answer 314

True

Question 315

T/F) In jurisdictions where the retreat doctrine exists as a limitation on the right to use deadly force in a defensive manner, it does not apply to the defense of others defense unless both the person using the force and the person who is being defended can retreat in complete safety.

Answer 315

True

Question 316

_____: [But for] the mental defect, the crime would not have occurred. [NH]

_____: I know it wrong, but i could not help it.

_____: Cant understand nature and consequences of actions. Even if he could, he is unable to understand moral consequences. [Majority]

______: Mental defect prevented them from understanding or conforming to the law.

Answer 316

Durham
Irresistible impulse
MN test [maj]
MPC test