Criminal Law/Proc Flashcards
What is the M’Naughten Rule?
D is entitled to an acquittal if:
1) A disease of the mind,
2) caused a defect of reason
3) which left D at time of his actions lacking the ability to either:
A) know the wrongfulness of his actions OR
B) understand the nature and quality of his actions.
What is an accomplice?
One who with the intent to commit a crime aids or encourages the principal before or during the commission of a crime.
Is mere knowledge of the sale of ordinary goods that will be used for criminal purposes sufficient for accomplice liability?
No, courts have held you need more than this
What is obtaining property (cash) by False Pretenses?
D obtains TITLE (rather than mere possession) of property by means lies, deceit, or false statement.
Further, cash transferred without any limitations can be construed to mean an intent to convey title to the property (in that case, the cash itself).
What is the type intent needed for attempted arson?
Specific intent, while Arson itself is a malice crime.
Can the doctrine of transferred intent apply to Attempt crimes? (See Arson example)
No.
EG - A homeowner’s specific intent to burn his OWN house down does NOT transfer to the nearby neighbor’s home
What is an exception to the voluntary intoxication defense to a specific intent crime?
When one has the requisite specific intent AND THEN DRINK TO GET UP YOUR NERVE this defense will not apply, bc you had the specific intent when you decided to commit the crime. Whereas developing the specific intent after voluntary intox, you have a valid defense.
Which crime is duress NOT a valid defense for?
Murder, bc one life is not more valuable than another
Are motions to suppress valid in grand jury proceeding?
No, motions based on exclusionary rule are premature in grand jury proceedings–all evidence may be considered.
Why doesn’t a passenger have standing to challenge a search of a car’s trunk?
Even if the search is illegal, a passenger does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the trunk of a car that is not hers.
What does an anonymous tip need to be considered reliable for a stop and frisk?
It must include more detail or predict some incriminating movement to give reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk.
What is the Open Fields Doctrine?
Anything outside curtilage of home is subject to police entry and search because it is held out to the public. Think rural areas and marijuana plants in an open field.
When (and for how long) does the 6A right to counsel right attach during a post charge lineup?
A post charge lineup is a critical stage of prosecution and the 6A right to counsel attaches as SOON as the accused is within sight of the identification witnesses, and includes the right to have an attorney present for the entire lineup.
Can silence be used against you after youve been given Miranda warnings?
No. There is no duty to deny any allegations after Miranda warnings have been given.
What is the difference between the suspicion needed for a Terry stop and a Patdown?
A police officer has the authority to briefly detain a person for investigative purposes if he has a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts of criminal activity.
Whereas a police officer may pat down a detained person only if the officer has a reasonable suspicion to believe that the detainee is armed and dangerous.
Assuming they have reasonable grounds for a search, what is the allowable scope of a school official’s search?
A school search must not be “excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.”
If a grand jury finds probable cause to prosecute, it will issue a/an __________.
If a charging grand jury determines probable cause to prosecute it will return a bill of indictment as a “true bill.”
What does the Redline case hold? (Felony murder)
Under the Redline case, felony murder liability does not attach when the person killed is a co-felon.
The other two theories–agency and proximate cause do not address this situation where the victim is a co-felon.
Does a judge have a constitutional obligation to determine whether a D is competent to stand trial? Why should the judge do so?
Yes.
If the defendant is tried and convicted but it later appears that he was incompetent to stand trial, the judge’s failure to raise the issue or to request a determination of competency does not constitute a waiver of the competency issue. [Pate v. Robinson (1966)] Therefore, if the trial judge observes the defendant acting in such a way that may indicate he is incompetent to stand trial (e.g., meowing, chasing imaginary squirrels), she should conduct further inquiry to determine the competency of the defendant.
If a D is convicted of manslaughter, and the conviction is overturned on appeal, may D be retried for murder at a second trial? Why or why not?
No. The Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits retrying a defendant whose conviction has been reversed on appeal for any offense more serious than that for which she was convicted at the first trial.
(This right is violated by retrial for a more serious offense, even if at the second trial the defendant is only convicted of an offense no more serious than that for which she was convicted at the first trial.)
Where two persons are tried together and one has given a confession implicating the other, may the confession be admitted?
The general rule is that the Sixth Amendment right to confront adverse witnesses prohibits the use of such a statement. However, the statement may be admitted if:
(i) all portions of the statement referring to the other defendant can be eliminated (so that there is no indication of that defendant’s involvement);
(ii) the confessing defendant takes the stand and subjects himself to cross-examination with respect to the truth or falsity of what the statement asserts; OR
(iii) the confession of the nontestifying co-defendant is being used to rebut the defendant’s claim that his confession was obtained coercively, in which case the jury must be instructed as to the purpose of the admission.
If a statute protects members of a class, can a member of that class be convicted of a crime under that statute?
If a statute is intended to protect members of a limited class from exploitation or overbearing, members of that class are presumed to have been intended to be immune from liability, even if they participate in the crime in a manner that would otherwise make them liable.
What are the inherently dangerous felonies at common law that can accompany felony murder?
Remember BARRK:
- Burglary
- Arson
- Robbery
- Rape
- Kidnapping
Is withdrawal a valid defense to conspiracy? Explain.
If a conspirator has made a legally effective withdrawal from the conspiracy at the time of commission of such a crime, he will not be liable for that crime.
Under common law, withdrawal requires an affirmative act that notifies all members of the conspiracy and is done in time for them to have the opportunity to abandon their plans. Withdrawal, however, will not be a defense to the conspiracy charge itself.
Under the MPC, withdrawal IS an effective defense to conspiracy, though an attempt to thwart is required.
