Practice Question

Question 1

Necessity Defense

Answer 1

The defense of necessity may be raised when the defendant has been compelled to commit a criminal act because of nonhuman events; the haem sought to be avoided must be greater than the harm committed; additionally, the harm must be imminent and there must be no noncriminal alternative

Question 2

MPC on Unreasonable belief

Answer 2

A genuine but unreasonably belief by the defendant that emergency exists will not deprive him or her of the defense, unless the crime is one that can be committed “recklessly” or “negligently” not just purposefully.

Question 3

When is self-defense applicable?

Answer 3

When the defendant is resisting force that is unlawful

Question 4

When can one use deadly force?

Answer 4

The only time one may use deadly force in self-defense is to defend oneself against serious bodily harm. Deadly force is generally defined as force that is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm.

Question 5

Common Law Definition of Self Defense

Answer 5

For the defense of self-defense, the harm being defended against must be reasonably imminent. The danger that one may be attacked tomorrow (even if it is reasonably certain to occur) will not suffice

Question 6

MPC definition of self-defense

Answer 6

The use of self-defense is allowed only to a person who is protecting himself against unlawful force that will be “used on the present occasion.”

Question 7

When can the initial aggressor use self-defense?

Answer 7

One who is the initial aggressor can assert self-defense if the defendant provoked the exchange but only used non-deadly force and the other party responds with deadly force.

AND

If the defendant-aggressor withdraws from the conflict and the other initiates a second conflict, the defendant may use nondeadly force and may use deadly force if he or she is threatened with death or serious bodily harm.

Question 8

Retreat under the MPC?

Answer 8

The MPC requires that if one could safely retreat, they must do so rather than use deadly force.
However: do not require retreat where the attack takes place in the defendant’s dwelling (so long as the defendant was not the initial aggressor)

Question 9

Mistaken Belief

Answer 9

If a person mistakenly but reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent fanger, they can act in self-defense.

Question 10

When may a person assert a “defense of others’ claim”

Answer 10

1. if he or she reasonably believes that the other person is in imminent danger of unlawful bodily harm
2. The degree of the force he is using is no greater than what seems necessary to prevent the harm
3. he or she believes that the party being assisted would have the right to use in his/her own defense the force that the defendant proposes to use in the assistance

Question 11

Defense of Property

Answer 11

One has the right to use force to defend one’s property against wrongful taking if the degree of force used is not more than appears reasonably necessary to prevent the taking.

Note: Virtually never if the use of deadly force reasonable to defend property

Question 12

Who gets the privilege to use force (at least non-deadly) to make an arrest for any felony?

Answer 12

Police Officer NOT private citizen

A police officer does get the benefit of reasonable mistake, however, a private citizen does not get the benefit of a reasonable mistake, and acts at his or her own peril

Question 13

What is needed for Attempt Liability?

Answer 13

Mere intent is not sufficient for attempt liability – the defendant must be shown to have committed some overt act in furtherance of his or her plan

Question 14

MPC Attempt Liability

Answer 14

There is attempt liability under the MPC if the defendant does “an act or omission constituting a substantial step in the course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime,” but the conduct will not constitute such a “substantial step” unless it is strongly corroborative of the actor’s criminal purpose.

Question 15

Factual Impossibility

Answer 15

Courts almost always reject the defense of factual impossibility. The prevailing rule is that the defendant may be convicted of attempt if, had the facts been as the defendant believed them to be, there would have been a crime.

Question 16

Defense of Renunciation

Answer 16

Most courts will acquit a defendant of an attempt crime if he or she shows that he or she changed his mind or abandoned his or her plan to commit the crime

The Renunciation must be voluntary

Question 17

What does prosecution need to show to convict someone of Conspiracy?

Answer 17

In a conspiracy case, the prosecution must show that the defendant agreed with at least one other person to commit a crime. However, there does not need to be “direct” evidence, circumstantial evidence will suffice.

NEEDS TO BE AGREEMENT.

Additionally, a person may only be convicted of conspiracy if he or she had actual intent to further the criminal objective, not just knowledge of the objective.

Question 18

When would someone not be guilty for accomplice liability?

Answer 18

When the defendant knows that his conduct will encourage or assist another person in committing a crime but does not particularly intend or desire to bring about that criminal result, most courts hold that the defendant is not liable as an accomplice to the crime.

Question 19

Natural and Probable Accomplice Liability

Answer 19

If the defendant has assisted or encouraged his or her principal to commit a particular offense, and the principal commits not only this offense but others as well, most courts will make the defendant liable for the additional crimes if they are the “natural and probable” consequences of the conduct that the defendant did intend to assist.

Note: the MPC rejects this

Question 20

Defense of Withdrawl for conspiracy

Answer 20

Just as one charged with conspiracy may sometimes raise the defense that he or she withdrew or was renounced, someone who has given aid or encouragement prior to a crime, if they change their mind, may be able to withdraw and thus avoid accomplice liability.

However, it is not enough for the defendant to just have a subjective change of heart and give no further assistance to the crime. They must at least make it clear to the other party that he or she is repudiating his or her past aid or encouragement.

Question 21

Can a victim be charged if they were part of the class that the statute aims to protect?

Answer 21

No. where a crime is defined mainly to protect a certain class of victims, the victim will not be convicted as an accomplice to the crime even if he or she actively helped cause the crime to be committed. (ex 15 year old consents to having sex with a 20 year old, but the statutory rape statute prevents sex with anyone under the age of 16 - the 16 year old could not be charged as an accomplice, even though they consented.)

Question 22

Justification is based on:

Answer 22

The actions of the provoker

Question 23

Excuse is based on:

Answer 23

The state of mind of the provoked

Question 24

Definition of Burglary

Answer 24

entering an occupied structure with an intent to commit a felony therein

Question 25

MPC elements of Duress

Answer 25

• Threat
• well-grounded fear
• no reasonable opportunity to escape
• person cannot put themselves into the situation

Question 26

Common Law elements of Duress

Answer 26

• Threat
• well-grounded fear
• no reasonable opportunity to escape
• person cannot put themselves into the situation
• threat MUST be immediate
• cannot be used as a defense for murder or homicide

Question 27

Elements of Self Defense at common law

Answer 27

1. must be necessary
2. must be imminent (arg)
3. must be proportional
4. must be reasonable (arg)
5. no alternative (arg)
6. not the aggressor
7. against unlawful force

Question 28

castle doctrine

Answer 28

a person does not have to retreat in their own home