Final Study Set

All of the following are conduct crimes, except:

Murder

Generally, in a criminal matter, it is the prosecution's burden to raise defenses, but it is the defendant's burden to persuade the jury of the defenses, by a preponderance of the evidence, or by any other standard set by statute.

False

Which of the following statements are true?

The key difference between a "crime" and a "civil wrong" is that a "crime" incurs a moral condemnation by society.

Which of the following statements are true regarding justification and excuse defenses?

All of these are correct.

Which of the following statements are true regarding the "reasonable belief" requirement in a self defense claim at common law?

All of these are correct.

At common law, which of the following are predicate felonies for a felony murder conviction?

BARRK Arson, Robbery, Rape, Kidnapping, Burglary.

A businessman lived on the second floor of a small convenience store/gas station that he owned. One night he refused to sell a customer a six-pack of beer after hours, saying he would not violate state laws. The customer became enraged and deliberately drove his car into one of the gasoline pumps, severing it from its base. There was an ensuing explosion causing a ball of fire to go from the underground gasoline tank into the building. As a result, the building burned to the ground and the businessman was killed by the smoke inhalation from the fire. In a common law jurisdiction, if the customer is charged with murder and arson, he should be:

Convicted of both offenses.

Defendant is charged with assault and battery in a common law jurisdiction. The state's evidence shows that Victim was struck in the face by Defendant's fist. In which of the following situations is Defendant most likely to be not guilty of assault and battery?

Defendant was suffering from an epileptic seizure and had no control over his motions.

In which of the following situations is the Defendant most likely to be guilty of common law murder?

While committing a robbery of a liquor store, Defendant accidentally drops his revolver, which goes off. The bullet strikes and kills Johnson, a customer in the store.

Suppose that the ABC Gang, which includes Betty Florsheim, decides to stick up a bank one morning. Along with three other gang members, Florsheim enters the bank with guns drawn and fire off a few rounds in order "to get everyone's attention." One of the bullets bounces off of the ceiling and hits a bank customer, killing her. Florsheim is charged with murder in a common law jurisdiction. Please consider the following statements regarding whether Florsheim should be convicted of murder based on a felony murder theory.

A felony murder charge would succeed because defendant caused a death during commission of a dangerous felony.

A defendant incurred heavy gambling losses to a bookie. Short of cash, the defendant sought help from his uncle. When the uncle refused to help his irresponsible nephew, the defendant decided to get even. One morning as the housekeeper was preparing his uncle's breakfast, the defendant entered the kitchen, and unnoticed, dropped arsenic into the teapot from which his uncle was always served his tea. The defendant then hurriedly left the house and went to play golf. Shortly thereafter, the housekeeper served the uncle the poisoned tea, causing his unfortunate death. At common law, the defendant's culpability for his uncle's death would most probably be as:

B. A principal in the first degree.

Wyatt, a first-year law student, moved into a new studio apartment near his Law School just in time for school to start. The apartment and the Law School were both located in a downtown, urban area with high crime rates. Wyatt was from a rural area in another state and was more than a little apprehensive about walking in his new neighborhood at night. As much as he could, he tried not to go out in the evenings.One evening during his third week of school, however, Wyatt had to stay late at the law school for a meeting of his first-year section. Knowing that he was going to have to return home late that evening and, still apprehensive even after having lived in the neighborhood for nearly a month, Wyatt put his handgun in his backpack and took it to school with him. He was not licensed to carry this gun in the state in which he now resided.Walking home from school late that evening, Wyatt kept looking around anxiously and walking as fast as he could. After a couple of minutes, he could hear footsteps behind him, which made him walk even faster. As he picked up his pace, the footsteps behind him came quicker. Wyatt broke into a run. The quickening footsteps behind him indicated that the person following him was running as well.Wyatt wheeled around, reaching inside his backpack for his gun at the very same moment. As he wheeled around, Wyatt could see that a young boy (who turned out to be Levi) was chasing after him, carrying what looked to be a large, brightly multi-colored, plastic "weapon" in his hands. That "weapon" was actually a massive squirt gun, commonly called a "super soaker." But Wyatt did not know what the "weapon" actually was. He had never seen a super soaker or a squirt gun of that size. Terrified, Wyatt fired three shots at Levi's chest, just after Wyatt pulled the trigger on his super soaker and doused Wyatt with water. Levi subsequently died from the bullet wounds.Wyatt has been charged with murder. Wyatt's defense counsel, Katherine, referred to him by his Criminal Law professor, has argued that since Wyatt thought that Levi was going to shoot him, the most serious homicide offense of which he could be found guilty is voluntary manslaughter. Which of the following is most accurate:

All of the above are true.

Which of the following statements are true?

All of these are correct: Stand your ground removes to duty for someone to retreat before using deadly force. There are about 38 states that now use stand your ground rules. Florida is the first state to introduce stand your ground rules.

Which of the following statements are true regarding the "res gestae" requirement of felony murder at common law?

All of these are true.

Which of the following statements are true regarding the different approaches to felony murder when the killing is perpetrated by a non-felon?

All of these are true.

Althea was very depressed. And for good reason. Her husband had recently left her for another woman, Althea's best friend. Both of her children were narcotics addicts. Half of her friends on Facebook had recently de-friended her. And her dog had fleas and they had spread throughout her studio apartment. Althea just plain couldn't take any more. She decided to end it all.Althea took the elevator to the top—fourth—floor of her favorite, downtown department store. She then snuck into a restricted, employee sonly area and found and managed to pry open the door to the roof. Once there, Althea walked to the edge of the roof, climbed up and stood on the precipice, and looked down at all the people hurrying along on the sidewalk below. She debated whether or not to actually jump. Finally, she decided she'd had enough. She jumped.Althea did not die from her fall, however. Her descent was slowed, first, by striking the ledge one floor underneath where she stood, then by hitting the large awning above the ground-floor, department-store windows, and finally, by striking a pedestrian, Paige, who had just left the department store and was standing on the sidewalk below.Althea did suffer a concussion, serious internal injuries, a broken hip, a broken arm and wrist and numerous lacerations. But, tragically, Paige was struck on the head by Althea's falling body. Althea's weight and momentum smashed Paige to the sidewalk and she suffered numerous severe injuries, including a fractured skull, which ultimately led to her death.After recovering from her own injuries, Althea has been charged with murder in the death of Paige. Which of the following is most accurate:

Althea can be convicted of murder on these facts.

Which of the following actors "knows" that his/her conduct could cause a death?

Clem, who grabs Luigi by the throat with both his hands, and squeezes as hard as he can for three full minutes.

Heinrich saw a notice on a supermarket bulletin board in which Laura and Michelle offered to come and clean up people's basements for a very reasonable price. Heinrich contacted Laura and Michelle and arranged for them to spend one morning later in the week cleaning out his very cluttered and filthy basement. Laura and Michelle worked furiously for four hours in Heinrich's basement without taking a break. They took out and discarded all of the trash and broken items. They straightened up and organized all of the remaining, unbroken items that Heinrich told them to keep there. When all of that was accomplished, they then swept up and mopped the basement floor and, finally, dusted all of the shelves and the basement walls. After they had completed all of this work, Laura and Michelle went to Heinrich to be paid the $80.00 he had agreed to pay them ($10 an hour for each of them). Laughing at them, Heinrich refused to pay them anything at all and threatened them if they didn't leave his premises immediately. Laura and Michelle have filed a criminal complaint against Heinrich with the local police. The jurisdiction in which the foregoing took place still uses the common law larceny offense. Did Heinrich commit larceny in these circumstances? Which of the following is true:

B. Heinrich is not guilty of larceny because he did not take any personal property.

Miles borrowed Kate's television set for the weekend because his was broken. Miles wanted to watch a couple of important football games over the weekend and he knew that Kate, a co-worker, was going to be out of town and wouldn't be using her set anyway. Kate was perfectly agreeable to lending her television set to Miles. But, she made him "swear" to her that he would return it some time on Monday, in time for her to watch her favorite television program that was broadcast on Monday evenings. Miles told Kate that that was no problem. He would return the set first thing Monday morning, before Kate left for work. Miles had every intention of returning Kate's television on Monday morning. But on Saturday morning, he received a call from his father, who lived a four-hour drive away with his mother. His father told him that Miles' mother had been hospitalized, and Miles immediately packed a suitcase and drove four hours to the hospital to join them at the hospital. He never gave any thought to Kate's television as he was preoccupied with his mother's illness. As a result, Miles did not talk to Kate or return her television set on Monday morning as he had agreed. Miles did not even return from visiting his parents until Thursday night, after his mother was released from the hospital on Thursday morning. However, on Wednesday morning, after Miles had not returned her television set and she had not heard anything from him and he had not showed up for work, Kate called the police and accused Miles of stealing her television set. She subsequently went down to the station house and filed a criminal complaint against him. Is Miles guilty of a common law or traditional theft crime in these circumstances? Which of the following is most accurate:

B. Miles is not guilty of any common law or traditional theft crime.

Bill, a summer lifeguard at a municipal swimming pool, failed to notice that Cindy, a six-year old child who was swimming in the crowded pool, had slipped off the flotation devices that had been on her arms, and was drowning. Bill failed to notice this because he was preoccupied with flirting with two young women wearing skimpy swimsuits who were standing next to him, busy flirting with him. By the time Bill was finally alerted by others to Cindy's distress and jumped into the water to rescue her, it was too late. Cindy never regained consciousness. Bill has been charged with involuntary manslaughter in the death of Cindy. His defense counsel claims that he is not guilty of these charges, inter alia, because he committed no criminal act. Rather, Bill simply failed to act—an omission, which is not deemed to be culpable in criminal law. Which of the following is most accurate in a Common Law jurisdiction?

Bill's failure to act satisfies the actus reus element of involuntary manslaughter.

Which of the following actors can be said to have consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk?

Charlie, a gas station attendant, tosses his lit cigarette aside, hoping that it will land far enough from the pumps. Instead, the cigarette ignites a cloud of gasoline vapor.

Colin owned a power chain saw which began to give him some serious problems. When he was cutting with it, he started to get some resistance from the cutting chain which caused the saw to violently kick upward and sometimes it made his hand slip from the handle and the cutting chain jerk toward his arm and chest. Although Colin was never actually injured on these occasions, using this saw began to make him very nervous and so he decided to buy a new one. He threw the old power saw on top of a pile of old tools in the corner of his garage.About a year after this occurred, Colin and Lydia, Colin's wife, had a "yard sale" one weekend, where they offered for sale at very cheap prices a number of used and personal items they wanted to discard. Among the items they offered for sale was Colin's old power saw. "Hey," Lydia said to Colin, when she saw the saw on one of their folding tables, offered for sale, "isn't that saw of yours broken?" "Nah," Colin responded, "it still works. It's just a little screwed up. That's all. Everyone knows that the stuff you buy at a yard sale is a little screwed up."Lydia sold the old power saw to a neighbor, Garrett, for five dollars. Garrett tried to use the saw that very same afternoon. When he did, the saw immediately kicked back at him violently, the same way that it had when Colin used it. But, unlike Colin, Garrett was severely injured as a result of the kickback. Garrett's hand accidentally engaged the rapidly moving cutting chain as it kicked back, and the hand was severed. Garrett immediately passed out, and he ultimately died from the subsequent unchecked blood loss.Colin has now been charged with involuntary manslaughter in a common law jurisdiction due to his role in the sale of his defective power saw to Garrett, the use of which resulted in Garrett's death. Which of the following is true:

Colin is likely to be convicted of involuntary manslaughter on these facts.

D, 5'4" and 145 lbs., is sitting in his car preparing to leave a public parking lot. Decedent, 6'0" and to leave a public parking lot. Decedent, 6'0" and 200 lbs., walks over and requests help to start his 200 lbs., walks over and requests help to start his own vehicle. D says that he will only help if own vehicle. D says that he will only help if Decedent pays him $5.00. After a verbal Decedent pays him $5.00. After a verbal exchange, the Decedent lunges at the D with a exchange, the Decedent lunges at the D with a knife through the car window. D emerges with a knife through the car window. D emerges with a gun and immediately shoots Decedent in the head. gun and immediately shoots Decedent in the head. Self Defense?

D is not aggressor— CL proportionate force no self defense

D calls V a jerk. V is so offended that he menaces D with a gun. Is D justified in killing V?

D is not an aggressor under CL (words are not enough for provocation) unless it is followed by conduct. Would showing a gun cause self defense- NO

Olander stopped Yasmin as she was walking down the street late one night and, holding a knife on her, demanded that she give him her purse. Yasmin complied immediately, and Olander ran away with it. Unfortunately for him, a police officer observed all of the foregoing and Olander was immediately arrested. Olander has now been charged with armed robbery, assault and battery. All of these events took place in a jurisdiction which continues to use the common law in its Crimes Code. Which of the following is most accurate:

D. Answers (b) and (c) are correct, and answer (a) is incorrect.

Defendant worked as a corporate attorney in a New York law firm. Late one evening, he left the office and proceeded outside to his brand-new Bentley 1200. While in the parking lot, the Defendant noticed a gold and diamond Rolex watch lying on the ground. When he picked the watch up, the Defendant realized the watch belonged to one of the partners of the law firm that he worked at. The Defendant took the watch home with him, intending to return it the next day. The following morning, however, the Defendant decided to keep the partner's watch and did so. In a common law jurisdiction, the Defendant has committed which of the following offenses:

D. Neither Larceny nor embezzlement. (Because it doesn't state the jurisdiction follows the continuing trespass doctrine)

Dee Dee loaned Inga her whole CD collection for Inga to take with her on a two-week long road trip from New Hampshire to California, and back again. When Inga returned from the trip, she promptly returned the CDs to Dee Dee. The CDs were stored in three bulky storage albums. But when Dee Dee paged through the albums after they were returned to her, she discovered that twelve of her very favorite CDs were missing. Dee Dee called Inga and asked her what had happened to the missing CDs. Inga responded: "Look, Dee Dee, you never use those CDs any more. You know that. You have all of that same exact music on your iPod now. My friend Connie in San Francisco has an amazing CD collection. When I asked to borrow your CDs, I knew that there were a few of them that I wanted to give to her for her collection. So I gave them to her. Twelve lousy CDs, Dee Dee. Come on, it's no big deal. Get over it." Dee Dee did not get over it. She filed a criminal complaint against Inga with the local police. The jurisdiction in which the foregoing took place still uses the common law larceny offense. Did Inga commit the crime of larceny in these circumstances? Which of the following is true:

D. None of the above.(It is embezzlement)

Steven is s a storm tracker, who travels around the state chasing tornados in order to collect data for his research. One night Steven miscalculated his data and actually places himself directly in the path of the tornado. He quickly panics out of fear for his life and breaks into a home to take shelter in the basement, in order to save his life. Steven was later arrested and charged with criminal trespass in a common law jurisdiction. If Steven is acquitted, it is mostly likely because of the:

Defense of Necessity

Diana anonymously telephoned a false bomb threat to a public high school. The school was evacuated and searched top to bottom, but, of course, nothing was found as there was no bomb there. Diana's role in making the call was discovered when her brother overheard her talking about it with one of her friends, and he turned her in for the $1,000 reward money. Diana was subsequently arrested and charged with the criminal offense of recklessly endangering another person. In the jurisdiction where these events took place, this offense is defined as follows: "A person is guilty of recklessly endangering another person where he or she recklessly engages in conduct which places or may place another person in danger of death or serious bodily injury." Recklessness is defined in this jurisdiction the same way it is defined in the Model Penal Code: "A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation." Which of the following is most accurate?

Diana is not guilty of recklessly endangering another person because no one was actually placed in danger of death or serious bodily injury.

Doris returned home four hours early from an out-of-town trip, having caught an earlier flight when her meeting was cancelled. As she entered her home, she heard strange noises coming from the upstairs bedroom. "Fred," she called out, yelling her husband's name, "Fred, is that you?"Receiving no answer in response to her shout, Doris quietly ascended the staircase and, continuing to hear the same noises coming from the bedroom, she cracked the bedroom door open just slightly and peered inside. What she saw was her husband and two other men, each of them naked except that the two men other than her husband were partially clothed in furry animal costumes. All three of the men were engaged in sexual activity with one another. "Oh my sweet Lord!," Doris screamed, "What the f* * * are you doing, Fred?" But, engrossed in their activities, none of the three even heard her. They continued in their activities undeterred.Shocked, appalled, and disgusted, Doris ran downstairs to the dining room and retrieved her pistol from the bottom drawer of the china cabinet. She then ran right back upstairs, ran into the bedroom, and shot her husband, Fred, once right in the head. Fred died instantly.Doris has been charged with murder with respect to the killing of her husband, Fred. Doris' defense counsel has argued that this charge should be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter and has made that the basis of Doris' defense. Which of the following is most accurate:

Doris is likely to be able to make a successful mitigating voluntary manslaughter defense on these facts.

The Defendant was fired from his sales job while visiting customers in another city. The Defendant was an excellent sales person for a company that sold household appliances. The Defendant failed to return the company car that he was using for his sales visits. Instead, he sold the car to an auto repair shop for cash. The Defendant has committed which of the following crimes:

Embezzlement

A father was terminally ill with a particularly painful form of cancer. His daughter visited him every evening in the hospital and for several months listened to his pleas to put him out of his misery. On her final visit, she gave her father a hug and then pulled a small revolver from her purse. She fired a single shot at her father killing him instantly. The daughter immediately broke down in tears and surrendered to the police. The daughter was charged with her father's death.

First degree murder; defined by this jurisdiction as the premeditated and deliberate killing of another human being.

A father was terminally ill with a particularly painful form of cancer. His daughter visited him every evening in the hospital and for several months listened to his pleas to put him out of his misery. On her final visit, she gave her father a hug and then pulled a small revolver from her purse. She fired a single shot at her father killing him instantly. The daughter immediately broke down in tears and surrendered to the police. The daughter was charged with her father's death. What is the most serious offense of which the daughter can be convicted?

First degree murder; defined by this jurisdiction as the premeditated and deliberate killing of another human being.

A father lived with his son, who was an alcoholic. When drunk, the son often became violent and physically abused his father. As a result, the father always lived in fear. One night, the father heard his son on the front stoop making loud obscene remarks. The father was certain that his son was drunk and was terrified that he would be physically beaten again. In his fear, he bolted the front door and took out a revolver. When the son discovered that the door was bolted, he kicked it down. As the son burst through the front door, his father shot him four times in the chest, killing him. In fact, the son was not under the influence of alcohol or any drug and did not intend to harm his father. At trial in a common law jurisdiction, the father presented the above facts and asked the judge to instruct the jury on self-defense. How should the judge instruct the jury with respect to self-defense?

Give the self-defense instruction, because the evidence is sufficient to raise the defense.

Glenna cajoled and bullied Lidia into "playing" a "game" of "Russian roulette" with her. Russian roulette is an activity where only one bullet is put into the chamber of a gun, the chamber is spun, and each "player" aims the gun at his or head and pulls the trigger.In Russian roulette, the person pulling the trigger has a chance of shooting a bullet into his or head equal to one in however many bullets the firing chamber would ordinarily hold. In this particular case, however, Glenna didn't tell Lidia that she had actually taken—she thought— all of the bullets out of the gun's firing chamber. Glenna told Lidia instead that the gun was loaded with one—but only one—bullet. Glenna intended to mislead Lidia because she wanted to see how courageous (stupid?) Lidia was. But she thought that the gun was unloaded because she did not want to really take any risk that she or Lidia would actually shoot themselves.Unfortunately, although she thought that she had unloaded the gun entirely, Glenna in fact had failed to take all of the bullets out of the firing chamber. One bullet remained in the firing chamber, just as Glenna had told Lidia, but not what she actually believed was the case.Lidia went first, aimed the gun at her head, and pulled the trigger. The one bullet in the firing chamber fired into her head. She died instantaneously.Glenna has been charged with them murder of Lidia on the basis of this episode. Her defense counsel has argued that Glenna is not guilty of murder because she honestly thought that the gun was unloaded and, as a result, she did not believe that there was any risk that Lidia would be hurt or killed. Which of the following is true:

Glenna is likely to be convicted of murder on these facts.

A hospital patient had a heart ailment so serious that his doctors had concluded that only a heart transplant could save his life. The doctors arranged to have the patient flown to a bigger hospital to have the operation performed. The patient's nephew, who stood to inherit from him, poisoned him. The poisoned produced a reaction that required postponing the trip to the bigger hospital. The plane on which the patient was to have flown crashed, and all aboard were killed. By the following day, the patient's heart was so weakened by the effects of the poison that he suffered a heart attack and died. If charged with a criminal homicide in a Model Penal Code jurisdiction, the nephew should be found:

Guilty

Vin and Val, the Valley brothers, broke into the home of Lest, the President of Gold Nugget Bank, and kidnapped Lest's wife Lucy. The brothers took Lucy hostage, pointed a gun at her head and demanded that she drive them in her car to their hideout. As Lucy was driving done Busy Street, a lady pushing a baby in her stroller, suddenly stopped in the middle of the intersection. In order to avoid hitting the lady and her child, Lucy veered the car to the left, and intentionally struck a bystander killing him. If Lucy is subsequently prosecuted for the murder of the bystander in an old common law jurisdiction, she will most likely be found:

Guilty

A fleeing bank robber ran into a school and took the principal hostage at gunpoint. The police, who had received a detailed description of the clothing the robber was wearing, surrounded the school and demanded the robber come out with his hands up. When it began to get dark, the robber ordered the principal to undress, and the robber switched clothing with the principal. The robber tied the principal's hand to the side and pushed the principal out the front door first. Seeing that the first person out the front door did not emerge with hands up, and the person was wearing clothing the robber was described as wearing, a police shot and killed the principal. The robber was captured and put on trial for the murder of the principal. At common law, the jury should find the robber:

Guilty, because changing clothes with the principal was an act taken with extreme indifference to an unjustifiably substantial risk to human life.

Billy is walking on the pier and sees Alex plunge into the water, Billy shouts to Alex are you okay, Alex can't speak because he is drowning, Billy lies on his stomach and tries to reach out to pull Alex out of the water, and Billy gets hold of Alex's hand but is not strong enough to pull him out. Billy stands up and leaves. If Alex drowns, in a criminal prosecution Billy will most likely be found:

Guilty, because he voluntarily assumed the care of Alex.

A woman had a history of epileptic seizures which came without warning over the last five years. One day, as she was driving to town she had a seizure. She lost control of her car and struck a pedestrian who was lawfully crossing the street. The pedestrian died immediately thereafter as a result of his injuries. The woman is charged with involuntary manslaughter in a common law jurisdiction. She will most likely be found:

Guilty, because she knowingly and recklessly chose to drive her car.

A property owner was returning home one evening. When he got into his driveway he beeped open the garage door. As he approached the garage he saw some movement inside but couldn't tell what it was. He stopped the car, pulled his handgun from the glove compartment, and walked toward the garage. As he began to enter the garage a person jumped out from behind a pile of boxes and tried to run out of the garage, in a direction away from the owner. While heading for the outside area, the owner raised his gun and shot the individual dead. It turned out that the dead person was a 16-year-old unarmed teen from the neighborhood who apparently had been searching the garage for things to steal. Under the common law rule, will the owner be convicted of a criminal homicide charge?

He will be convicted because under these circumstances the man used unreasonable and excessive force in response to the situation.

Daniel killed his wife, Iris, by striking her repeatedly in the head with a hammer. He confessed to the police that he did this because he believed that she was possessed by the Devil. Although Daniel claimed that he loved Iris very much, he nonetheless told the authorities that he believed that only by killing Iris could he free her soul from the clutches of evil.At trial for the murder of Iris, Daniel's defense counsel, trying to establish an insanity defense, put a psychiatrist on the stand who testified that Daniel was in a psychotic state when he killed Iris and that "he was acting on the basis of delusional ideas with homicidal impulses. These impulses were related to a suppressed post-traumatic stress disorder resulting from Daniel's having been sexually abused as a preschool child. This precipitated a psychotic rage and led to him killing Iris with a hammer. A rational person would not have assumed that his wife was possessed by the Devil. Daniel was basically in an intense psychotic state, acting without thought. This was not a rational person, it was a psychotic rage. There was little thought given to his criminal actions."In rebuttal, the prosecution presented testimony by a forensic psychiatrist who opined that "Daniel was psychosis-free when he killed Iris, but there are two other possible explanations for his behavior: paranoia and schizophrenia. I am confident that Daniel knew exactly what he was doing when he beat her to death. In my opinion, he would not have been able to do what he did to Iris if he had been psychotic."This jurisdiction uses the Model Penal Code test to determine whether an accused defendant was insane at the time of the alleged criminal act. Given this competing expert testimony, what are Daniel's chances of being found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity in these circumstances? Which of the following is most accurate:

If it can be established that Daniel lacked substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law, he would have a good insanity defense to these charges.

Velma lived with Teddy, a small time drug hustler. One morning Velma went down to the corner deli to pick up some eggs and happened to run into one of Teddy's friends. The friend asked her to take a small package back to the apartment and give it to Teddy. She took the package without asking what it contained. On her way back, she was stopped by the police. The package turned out to contain illegal drugs. Velma is charged under a law that prohibits "knowingly transporting" narcotics. In a Model Penal Code jurisdiction:

It would be proper to convict Velma only if she actually knew or was practically certain that the package contained illegal drugs.

Livonia, who lived alone and had a long history of mental illness, honestly believed that aliens from outer space were watching her every move and beaming harmful rays into her body. As a result of these irrational fears, Livonia rarely ventured outside of her home and she kept all of the doors closed and the window blinds shut all day and night long.One day, peeking through the drawn blinds of her front window, Livonia saw the two young children who lived across the street from her set up a lemonade stand in their front yard facing her home. Livonia believed that the space aliens had taken over the two children's bodies and that the lemonade stand was really a cover for the aliens' cameras and laser beams which were aimed at her house.As a result of her panic about this development, Livonia rushed upstairs to retrieve her late father's old .22 caliber rifle from the attic. She then loaded it with five old bullets that she found lying next to the rifle. Then she cracked open her front door and shot five times at the two children who were running the lemonade stand across the street. Fortunately for everyone, Livonia was not a good shot. She missed hitting either of the children—or anyone else—with any of her five shots.Livonia has been arrested and charged with two counts of attempted murder, one for each of the children she shot at with the rifle. Livonia's defense counsel, Charles, plans to use an insanity defense on her behalf in defense of these charges.This jurisdiction uses the Model Penal Code test to determine whether an accused defendant was insane at the time of the alleged criminal act. What are Livonia's chances of being found not guilty by reason of insanity in these circumstances? Which of the following is most accurate:

If it can be established that Livonia lacked substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of her conduct or to conform her conduct to the requirements of the law, she would have a good insanity defense to these charges.

Elizabeth was walking in County Park one evening when she noticed that she was being followed by a stranger, Mark, who was dressed only in a dirty black raincoat. Elizabeth began to walk faster, tripping into tree branches as she picked up her pace. In fact, Mark was a local resident who intended Elizabeth no harm. He was simply out for an evening's walk in the park after having taken a shower at home.While walking, Mark saw something drop from Elizabeth's purse onto the ground and he began to run after her to tell her. When Elizabeth heard Mark start running behind her, however, she became nervous as to his intentions, and began to run away from him. As it had rained earlier in the day, the ground was slippery and Elizabeth slipped to the ground while running. Mark, running up behind her, slipped as well and fell on top of her. As he fell, his raincoat opened, revealing that he was naked underneath.Finding a strange, nearly-naked man on top of her, Elizabeth began screaming: "Help! Help!" Hearing that, Mark jumped off of her and looked around to see what and where the emergency was. When he turned his back to Elizabeth, she struck him over the head with a large tree branch she picked up off of the ground.Dazed and bleeding from a scalp laceration, Mark staggered further into the park where he came across Kerry, who was skating along on roller blades. Because his vision was blurred from his injuries, Mark thought that Kerry was actually Elizabeth and he screamed at her: "Why did you hit me! I was just trying to help you! I'll teach you a lesson you'll never forget!"Mark then grabbed a large rock from the ground and threw it at Kerry's head. The rock struck Kerry right between the eyes, knocking her unconscious and sending her careening into John, another roller blader, who in turn rolled right over Robert, who was laying on the ground, fast asleep. Robert suffered major cranial injuries from the roller blade injuries (John rolled right over his head) and shortly thereafter, he died.You are an Assistant Public Defender in the jurisdiction where all of these events occurred. Mark has been charged with the crime of involuntary manslaughter of Robert. The Chief Public Defender has asked you to defend Mark against this charge. Which of the following is most accurate:

If the mens rea element for involuntary manslaughter in this jurisdiction is criminal negligence, the prosecution can clearly establish that element.

A man and a woman got in the man's car to go visit friends. The man had a few martinis during the preceding hour. It was lightly raining but he insisted on driving. When approaching a slippery curve on a winding roadway he lost control and crashed the car into a tree. He was traveling 10 miles above the speed limit. His passenger died and he was charged with involuntary manslaughter while driving DUI. The police took his blood sample at the hospital and his blood alcohol level was .07, right below the threshold level of .08 used for determining sobriety. He had passed a field sobriety test at the scene. He was also cited for speeding and driving too fast for conditions. Which of the following will the prosecution most likely be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a common law jurisdiction?

Involuntary manslaughter.

A victim was leaving his favorite local watering hole and contemplating a late night cheeseburger when he tripped over his own feet and fell on the sidewalk. A few moments later, the victim got up in a daze and stepped onto the street, where he was struck by a car driven by the defendant, who was speeding, in violation of state law. The victim dies in the hospital two hours later. Which of the following is the most serious crime for which the defendant could be found guilty at common law?

Involuntary manslaughter.

On the evening of October 2, 1998, Andrew and Jason met at a Joplin restaurant. After eating dinner and drinking beer, they decided to go to a downtown nightclub. Andrew and Jason got into Andrew's 1996 Ford F-150 pickup. En route, they stopped at a convenience store. Andrew remained in the vehicle while Jason entered the store and purchased a 40-ounce bottle of beer and a can of chewing tobacco. While in line, Jason stood behind Tammy.Tammy was the girlfriend of Gary, who was also parked outside the store, sitting in his car, smoking marijuana. When Jason exited the store, Tammy pointed him out to Gary. (Tammy later testified that she was upset and told Gary—falsely—that Jason made "a pass" at her.) Jason and Andrew then left the store in the pickup. Gary and Tammy were in Gary's car, driving close behind.When Andrew stopped at a stoplight, Gary pulled alongside in the right lane. Gary began to "exchange words" with Jason, accusing him of "messing with my woman." Gary got out of his car, reached through the passenger window of the pickup, and stabbed Jason in the neck, nearly severing his carotid artery and completely severing his jugular vein. Gary immediately returned to his car and fled the jurisdiction.The stab wound—4.5 to 6 inches deep—bled profusely. Bystanders attempted to slow the bleeding with clothing and towels. Paramedics arrived to find Jason unresponsive, from massive blood loss. Blood drained into Jason's airway, depriving him of oxygen. Jason died three months later. The cause of death was said to be from an infection in the area of the stab wound. The infection was a staph infection he acquired while hospitalized.You are an Assistant District Attorney. The District Attorney has asked you for your opinion whether Gary was the cause of Jason's death for purposes of charging him with a homicide offense. Which of the following is most accurate:

It was reasonably foreseeable that Jason would die as a result of Gary's actions, and his death was not too remote a consequence of Gary's actions to impose criminal culpability.

After drinking heavily at his bachelor party at a beachfront resort, the groom was helped into a speedboat by a few of his close friends and taken to a small island off the coast as a joke. They left him on the island which had a small shelter. As a result, the groom missed his wedding the next day. One of the groom's friends, Defendant, was charged with kidnapping. Kidnapping in this jurisdiction is defined as the "unlawful movement or concealment of a person without his or her consent." In his defense, the Defendant claims he was so intoxicated that he did not realize what he was doing, and that the groom had consented to being left on the island. Which of the following would not be helpful to the Defendant's defense?

Kidnapping is a general intent crime in this jurisdiction.

Angela had a medical marijuana license in the State of Colorado for treatment of a broken finger. While driving down to Florida for spring break, she was pulled over by Officer Reinaldo. He arrested her after he saw a half smoked marijuana cigarette in the ashtray. The search after arrest resulted in a quarter ounce of marijuana hidden in the arm rest. She was charged with possession, a specific intent crime in this jurisdiction. In court, what would her best defense be?

Lack of requisite mens rea.

Victim was a passenger on a subway car. Victim placed her pocketbook on the seat next to her and began to zip up her jacket. The Defendant was standing in front of the Victim and holding onto the handrail. Seeing the pocketbook unattended, the Defendant suddenly grabbed it and tried to run away. As he did so, the Victim became very frightened and fell backwards. She struck her head against the window and was knocked unconscious. In the commotion, the Defendant dropped the pocketbook and hurriedly exited the subway car empty-handed. The Defendant should be guilty of:

Larceny

Lashawn and Raheem, sitting on stools adjacent to one another at their neighborhood tavern and drinking beer, argued vociferously with one another about which of their favorite National Football League teams was the better team. Lashawn, an ardent Dallas Cowboys fan, could not believe that anyone else could possibly believe for one moment that the Baltimore Ravens were a better team than the Cowboys. Yet, that was exactly the position that Raheem advocated. At length and in lengthy statistical detail.After the argument raged back and forth for the better part of half an hour, Raheem muttered, "You're just an idiot. There's no talking sense to a Cowboys fan," at Lamar, and he turned away from him and back to his beer. Enraged, Lashawn grabbed his own beer bottle, held it tightly by the neck of the bottle, and slammed it against the bar top, smashing off the bottom of the bottle, leaving a dangerous jagged edge. (Lashawn had seen this maneuver accomplished in a movie, but was pretty surprised that it actually worked in real life.) Lashawn then immediately rammed the jagged edge of the bottle into Raheem's neck, twisting it brutally, and yelling, "Take that birdie boy!"Unfortunately, the resulting neck wound severed Raheem's carotid artery, spraying blood everywhere, and killing him in a matter of seconds. Lashawn was subsequently arrested and charged with first degree murder. Lashawn's defense counsel has argued that this charge should be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter and has made that the basis of Lashawn's defense. Which of the following is most accurate:

Lashawn is not likely to be able to make a successful mitigating voluntary manslaughter defense on these facts because any provocation by Raheem was not so serious that it would create passion in a reasonable person.

Livonia, who lived alone and had a long history of mental illness, honestly believed that aliens from outer space were watching her every move and beaming harmful rays into her body. As a result of these irrational fears, Livonia rarely ventured outside of her home and she kept all of the doors closed and the window blinds shut all day and night long.One day, peeking through the drawn blinds of her front window, Livonia saw the two young children who lived across the street from her set up a lemonade stand in their front yard facing her home. Livonia believed that the space aliens had taken over the two children's bodies and that the lemonade stand was really a cover for the aliens' cameras and laser beams which were aimed at her house.As a result of her panic about this development, Livonia rushed upstairs to retrieve her late father's old .22 caliber rifle from the attic. She then loaded it with five old bullets that she found lying next to the rifle. Then she cracked open her front door and shot five times at the two children who were running the lemonade stand across the street. Fortunately for everyone, Livonia was not a good shot. She missed hitting either of the children—or anyone else—with any of her five shots.Livonia has been arrested and charged with two counts of attempted murder, one for each of the children she shot at with the rifle. Livonia's defense counsel, Charles, plans to use an insanity defense on her behalf in defense of these charges.This jurisdiction uses the M'Naghten test to determine whether an accused defendant was insane at the time of the alleged criminal act. What are Livonia's chances of being found not guilty by reason of insanity in these circumstances? Which of the following is most accurate:

Livonia does not have a good insanity defense to these charges because she knew the nature and quality of her act.

Mother intending the death of Victim, her child, furnished poison to X a home nurse telling her it was medicine to give to Victim. X did not believe the Victim needed it and did not administer the poison. X placed the poison on a mantel where Sister, another child, gave it to Victim and Victim died. Which of the following statements are accurate?

Mother is guilty of Victim's death because Mother was the proximate cause.

The defendant bought a new bow and arrow set at a local sporting goods store and went to a public park to try it out. Based on prior experience, the defendant knew that practicing his marksmanship at the park was a violation of park regulations and constituted a misdemeanor. Right at the moment that the defendant fired his first arrow, a park ranger yelled at him from a distance to "stop shooting, stupid." Perturbed that he was caught so early, the defendant decided to fire an arrow a couple of feet above the ranger's head. Unfortunately, the defendant's aim was slightly off, and the arrow struck the ranger right between the eyes, killing him instantly. The defendant is charged with homicide for the park ranger's death. At trial, the jury was given instructions on common law murder and manslaughter. If the jury believes the defendant's testimony that he did not intend to hit the park ranger with the arrow, the most serious charge for which the jury may find him guilty is:

Murder

Will, an indigent, was walking through Central Park when he decided to rob someone. He hid behind a tree, lying in wait for a victim to approach. Shortly after, Vicky, a sixteen year-old girl, was walking in the park when Will suddenly jumped from his hiding place and accosted her. Although Willy only intended to rob his victim, he punched Vicky in her mouth and she fell to the ground. Will then grabbed her pocketbook and fled. Unknown to Will, Vicky suffered a fractured skull when she fell to the ground. Vicky subsequently died from her head injuries. Which of the following is the most serious crime for which Will can be found guilty at common law?

Murder

At a party, Diane and Victor agreed to play a game they called "spin the barrel." Victor took an unloaded revolver, placed one bullet in the barrel, and spun the barrel. Victor then pointed the gun at Diane's head and pulled the trigger once. The gun did not fire. Diane then took the gun, pointed it at Victor, spun the barrel, and pulled the trigger once. The gun fired, and Victor fell over dead. A statute in this jurisdiction defines murder in the first degree as an intentional and premeditated killing or one occurring during the commission of a common-law felony, and murder in the second degree as all other murder at common law. Manslaughter is defined as a killing in the heat of passion upon an adequate legal provocation or a killing caused by gross negligence. The most serious crime for which Diane can properly be convicted is:

Murder in the second degree, because Diane's act posed a great threat of serious bodily harm.

Josh unlawfully threatens to hit Don and Don, in order to avoid the blow, pushes Josh into oncoming traffic, killing him. Can Don claim self-defense?

No

A boyfriend and his girlfriend were attending a house party. While the party was in progress, a few teenagers from the neighborhood vandalized some of the cars parked outside the house. They broke the headlights and stole the battery from the boyfriend's car. When the party ended, the boyfriend and his girlfriend left the house and got into his car. The boyfriend, who was about to drive his girlfriend home, was unaware of what had happened. He tried to start the car, but it wouldn't turn on. Two police officers who were parked outside of the house, watched the boyfriend as he tried to start the car. They then approached the boyfriend and charged him with attempting to violate a local ordinance making it a misdemeanor to knowingly drive at night without headlights. The boyfriend's best defense to the charge is:

No requisite intent

Bill comes home from work one night to find his neighbor Enrique engaging in a sexual act with his girlfriend Sarah. Sarah does not know Bill saw her cheating. Bill decides that he wants to kill Sarah for revenge on the couples' upcoming skydiving trip. As an avid skydiver, Bill packs his and Sarah's parachutes for the trip. Bill knowingly packs a broken parachute that will not open when Sarah is in the air. On the day of the skydiving trip the couple arrives at the airport and takes off for their jump. Unbeknownst to Bill, Sarah has ingested hallucinogenic mushrooms before they jump out of the plane. In the air, Sarah begins to hallucinate, thinking that she is a bird and can fly. She decides not to pull the cord to her parachute, resulting in her death. In a Model Penal Code jurisdiction, will Bill be found guilty of murder?

No, because Bill's action was not the cause in fact of Sarah's death.

The president of a pharmaceutical firm received a report from his testing bureau that a manufactured lot of the firm's anti-cancer prescription medication was well below strength. Concerned about being able to fulfill contractual commitments, the president instructed his staff to deliver the defective lot. A cancer patient who had been maintained on the drug died shortly after beginning to take the defective pills. Medical evidence established that the patient would have lived longer had the drug been at full strength, but would have died before long in any event. The president was convicted of murder. On appeal, he argues that his conviction should be reversed. Should the conviction be reversed?

No, because the jury could have found that the pres¬ident's conduct was sufficiently reckless to constitute murder.

Defendant was involved in a car accident in which a passenger of the other car was seriously injured. Defendant exited his car and looked at the injured passenger, and after realizing that the passenger would survive her injuries, Defendant got back into his car and drove away without rendering aid. The Defendant was later arrested and charged with leaving the scene of an accident. Should the Defendant be convicted as charged?

No, because there is no duty to generally assist others.

The Spittsburgh, Spennsylvania (a state in the United States) Police Department received an anonymous call reporting that a young man in a black and gold jacket was leaning against the wall of the Spitt Law School Building, smoking marijuana. Immediately, a SWAT Team rushed to the site. When they arrived, they saw two young men, Barack and Mitt, and a young woman, Hillary, leaning against the wall. Barack was wearing a black and gold jacket and was smoking something that looked like a cigarette. The police officers rushed toward him, grabbed the cigarette, and Barack yelled: "Don't be taking my weed, man!" (A subsequent test of the contents of the "cigarette" revealed, however, that it was a blend of tobacco, oregano, and garlic powder.) After the officers grabbed his cigarette, Barack immediately ran away. Mitt and Hillary also ran away, but in a different direction.After running for two blocks, Barack dashed into the street and smacked right into John, who was riding a bicycle, knocking John to the ground. John's bike careened into a pedestrian, Ron, who had just been released from a mental institution that morning. Ron, believing the bike was actually a poisoned spear that had just been thrown at him by John, reached into his backpack and removed a semi-automatic weapon and sprayed the area with gunfire. Barack was wounded, and John was killed by the gunfire.Meanwhile, Mitt and Hillary were still running away in a different direction. As they were running, they saw Fred sitting on a motor scooter, blocking their path. Not wanting to slow down, Mitt and Hillary both hurled themselves at the scooter and toppled it over. Fred fell off the scooter and broke his nose.Fred's scooter then careened into a pedestrian, Johnna, causing her purse to fall off of her shoulder and the contents to spill out on the street. Mitt and Hillary saw that jewelry spilled from the purse and they looked at each other, then they each grabbed some of the jewelry and began to run off once again.Unfortunately for Mitt and Hillary, they ran right into a police officer who arrested them both. In a subsequent pat-down search of Hillary, the officer found that she was carrying strange-looking, hand-rolled cigarettes in her pockets. "Hey, don't be taking our tobacco-oregano-garlic powder smokes, man!," both Mitt and Hillary cried out. (A subsequent test of the contents of the cigarettes revealed, however, that they contained marijuana. Only marijuana. No tobacco. No oregano. No garlic.)You are an Assistant Public Defender in the county where these events took place. The Chief Public Defender has asked you to defend against second degree murder charges brought against Ron for the death of John. This jurisdiction does not allow imperfect self defense. Which of the following is true:

None of the these.

The Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution requires the prosecution in a criminal matter to prove each element of a crime and defense:

None of these

Which of the following statements are false regarding a killing done under "Extreme Emotional Disturbance" (EED) under the Model Penal Code?

None of these are false.

Which of the following statements are false regarding an aggressor at common law?

None of these: A person is never the aggressor if his or her conduct is lawful. A person is an aggressor if he starts a non-deadly conflict. Generally, the first person who uses force is the aggressor.

A thug approached the defendant on a street, brandishing a gun. The thug told the defendant that he (the defendant) had to burn down a store across the street or he was going to shoot him. The defendant complied at gunpoint, starting a fire in the store with gas and matches. Soon after the fire started, the owner of the store rushed into the store trying to save her important papers. In doing so, the owner was overcome by smoke and died in the fire. The defendant is charged with the criminal homicide of the store's owner in a common law jurisdiction. The most likely result is that the defendant will be found:

Not guilty of murder under a felony murder analysis, because duress is a defense to arson.

Defendant broke into Vance's home and kidnapped Vance's wife, Demi. Defendant took Demi hostage, pointed a gun to her head, and demanded that she drive them to their hideout in her own car. As Demi was driving down Main Street, a woman pushing her baby in a stroller suddenly stopped in the middle of the intersection. In order to avoid hitting the woman and her child, Demi veered the car to the left, and intentionally struck bystander Victor, instantly killing him. If Demi is prosecuted for the murder of Victor in a Model Penal Code jurisdiction, she will most likely be found:

Not guilty, by reason of choice of evils.

A walks down the street and is confronted by B who pulls a knife, drags A into an alley, shoves who pulls a knife, drags A into an alley, shoves him against a wall and tells A to hand over his him against a wall and tells A to hand over his Rolex. A pulls out a sub-machine gun and kills B. Can A claim self-defense? What if instead of a knife, B was armed with a cheerleaders baton?

Not proportionate Cheer baton- no

Amos decided to celebrate his twenty-first birthday by shooting his rifle into the air twenty-one times. Of course, what goes up, must come down. One of the bullets that he shot into the air in this celebratory fashion fell to earth and hit four year-old Tommy in the top of his head, killing him instantly. Tommy was more than a quarter mile away from where Amos shot his rifle into the air and was not visible to Amos as he shot.

On these facts, Amos cannot be found guilty of first degree murder in the death of Tommy because he clearly did not act with premeditation and deliberation.

Kenyatta testified that he met with Quentin (a/k/a "Heat") to discuss the sale of one and one-quarter kilograms of cocaine that he (Kenyatta) had in his possession. Quentin told Kenyatta that he knew someone who would buy the cocaine. Kenyatta responded that he didn't want the buyer to know that he was selling drugs, and that Quentin would have to "serve" him. That evening, Kenyatta drove a Lexus sports utility vehicle (SUV) to the home of Quentin's girlfriend. Quentin then joined him in the SUV, and they set out to locate the buyer. Following Quentin's directions, Kenyatta drove to the Concordia Apartments on Westwood Drive. Quentin exited the vehicle, carrying the cocaine in a plastic garbage bag. Quentin walked a short distance and met with a man Kenyatta later identified as Damaris. Damaris and Quentin walked toward one of the apartment buildings and disappeared from view, while Kenyatta waited in the SUV. When Quentin failed to return after nearly half an hour, Kenyatta placed a call to his cellular telephone. He asked Quentin why the transaction was taking so long. Quentin told Kenyatta that the buyer wanted to negotiate some changes in the original agreement. Kenyatta then exited the SUV and Damaris approached him and told him that he would take him to Quentin. Kenyatta and Damaris walked along the outside of one of the nearby apartment buildings. At this time, Kenyatta did not see Quentin. But Kenyatta observed that Damaris flinched nervously each time they passed a doorway. Immediately after they had passed the fourth doorway, Quentin burst out of it from where he was hiding and yelled "I just can't do it. Run, Kenyatta! Get the f* * * outta here!" Then Quentin ran off. Alarmed, Kenyatta turned to Damaris and said, "wait a minute. What's going on? I'm going to waste you right now, you're screwing with me." Kenyatta then shoved Damaris against the apartment building wall. But Damaris pulled a gun out of the waistband of his pants, pointed it at Kenyatta, and said, "Give it up, man. Give me all of your cash." Kenyatta attempted to grab for the gun, but Damaris fired at him first. A bullet went through Kenyatta's shoulder and hit his face, and he fell to the ground. Damaris fled the scene on foot. A nearby resident called the police. Kenyatta told an officer at the scene that Heat had set him up, and that Heat's real first name was Quentin. Kenyatta was transported to the hospital, where his injuries were treated. You are an Assistant Public Defender in a jurisdiction that allows for abandonment as a defense to conspiracy, and are defending Quentin and Damaris who have both been charged with conspiracy to rob Kenyatta. Which of the following is true:

Quentin does not have a tenable abandonment defense to the charge of conspiracy to rob Kenyatta.

Sally is a lifeguard for the local country club. She hates her job and can't wait to go off to college when the summer ends. Sally is the only lifeguard on duty when a swarm of children jump in the pool, with no attending adult in sight. Sally notices that a few of the kids are in the youth division of her recreational swim team, so she feels no need to pay attention. It's a hot summer day, so Sally decides to leave her post to grab a quick drink at the snack bar. Five minutes later, Sally came back and sees that one of the children has drowned. Under the Model Penal Code, what is Sally's culpability level for the child's death?

Recklessly

Sally is a lifeguard for the local country club. She hates her job and can't wait to go off to college when the summer ends. Sally is the only lifeguard on duty when a swarm of children jump into the pool, with no attending adult in sight. Sally notices that a few of the kids are in the youth division of her recreational swim team, so she feels no need to pay attention. It's a hot summer day, so Sally decides to leave her post to grab a quick drink at the snack bar. Five minutes later, Sally came back and sees that one of the children has drowned. In a Model Penal Code jurisdiction, what is Sally's level of culpability for the child's death

Recklessly

Don broke into his neighbor's garage to steal some gasoline by siphoning it out of the car. When Don lit a match to check the level of the gasoline, the fumes ignited and caused an explosion. The ensuing fire consumed the garage. Don has been convicted under a statute that prescribes punishment for anyone who "intentionally or knowingly sets fire to a building." In a typical non-Model Penal Code jurisdiction, if there is an appeal, the conviction should be:

Reversed because Don did not act with the mens rea specified in the statute.

A husband and wife were walking to their car one evening after having seen a movie. As they were passing a dark alleyway, a person leaped out brandishing a gun. The person pushed the wife against the wall of a nearby building, held the gun to her head, and demanded money from the husband. The husband handed over his cash. The person grabbed the cash and took off. At common law, which of the following listed in descending order of seriousness, is the most serious crime for which the person may be convicted?

Robbery from the husband

Sergio has a sleep disorder that causes him occasionally to wander around his home late at night and to make other movements without being aware that he is doing so. One night, Sergio, while sleepwalking in his living room, tripped over an electrical cord and fell onto and seriously injured a friend, Ilsa, who was sleeping on the living room couch. Which of the following is most accurate in a Common Law jurisdiction?

Sergio did not commit a criminal act because his actions were involuntary since he was sleepwalking at the time he injured Ilsa.

Stuart brutally beat Ellie to death with a lead pipe, hitting her violently in the head more than two dozen times. Stuart was forced to commit this criminal act by Loomis, Ellie's bitter and psychotic ex-boyfriend.Loomis held a loaded gun on Stuart, and was present during the entire event. He told Stuart that he would shoot him if Stuart did not beat Ellie with the lead pipe immediately until she stopped moving. He would not let Stuart stop beating her until that moment. After the assault was completed and Ellie lay unmoving on the floor, Loomis shot and killed himself.Stuart has been charged with the crime of murder in the death of Ellie in this common law jurisdiction. Does Stuart have a tenable defense to this charge? Which of the following is most accurate:

Stuart does not have a good duress defense to this charge because actions undertaken in response to a threat never justify an act of homicide.

When a criminal statute is determined to be ambiguous and the court construes the statute most favorable to the accused, the court has employed which of the following theories of statutory construction:

The Rule of Lenity

The Model Penal Code is the most uniform set of criminal laws in the United States, and in the absence of Criminal Law based on Common Law, states are required to follow the Model Penal Code.

The United States Constitution is a limit as well as a source of criminal law.

The defendant, angered because a rival gang member had twice beaten him up after school, obtained a heavy lead pipe and waited in a deserted alleyway which he knew the rival took as a route home every day after school. When his enemy came walking down the alley, the defendant leapt out behind him and smashed the pipe into the victim's head, knocking him to the ground. The defendant then rolled the victim over and pounded his face with 15 to 20 heavy blows with the lead pipe, killing him. The jurisdiction defines first degree murder as murder committed with premeditation and deliberation. All other murders are defined as second degree murders. If the defendant is convicted of first degree murder (as opposed to second degree murder), it will be because:

The defendant's mental state up to and including the moment of the attack determines that the act is first degree murder.

Two men drinking at a local bar got into a heated argument. The small, slightly built man knew that the large burly man had a short fuse, yet he continued to argue with him. The larger man insulted the smaller man's religion and national origin, whereupon the smaller man spat on the other, who responded by pouring a glass of beer over the smaller man's head. The smaller man then punched the larger man in the nose, catching him off guard and knocking him to the floor. The larger man got to his feet, pulled out a knife, and advanced toward the other, who was standing by the door. The smaller man reached inside his boot and drew out a small gun and shot the larger man, killing him instantly. This common law jurisdiction makes it a crime to carry a concealed weapon. The smaller man is charged with murder. If the smaller man claims the killing was in self-defense, which of the following is the most helpful to the prosecution?

The smaller man was standing very close to the door and could have broken off the affray if he had chosen to do so.

Three men in masks entered a bank to commit an armed robbery. A bank guard quickly pulled his gun and told the men to stand down. One of the robbers began to put his hand in his pocket, which the guard believed indicated that the robber was going for a gun. The guard promptly shot the robber dead. The police entered at that moment and arrested the other two robbers. Both men were arrested for robbery and for the murder of the third robber. The prosecution claimed that this was allowed under the modern common law felony murder rule. What will be the most likely outcome of the murder charges against the two robbers?

They are not guilty of murder because modern felony murder jurisprudence does not hold a co-conspirator criminally liable for the unintended death of an accomplice who was shot by a victim, an officer, or a bystander.

Two women decided to steal some clothing from their favorite department store. One of the woman carried a large shopping bag containing a gun into the store. The other woman did not know that her partner had a gun in the shopping bag. After the women placed three dresses into the shopping bag, a clerk became suspicious and approached the women. The women tried to leave the store in a hurry, as they did, the clerk grabbed the bag, which fell to the floor. When the bag hit the floor, the gun discharged, killing the clerk. Which of the following would be the women's best defense to the charge of felony murder at common law?

They committed larceny, not robbery, by placing the three dresses in the shopping bag.

Kathy, a two-year-old, became ill with meningitis. Jim and Joan, her parents, were members of a group who believed fervently that if they prayed enough, God would not permit their child to die. Accordingly, they did not seek medical aid for Kathy and refused all offers of such aid. They prayed continuously. Kathy died of the illness within a week. Jim and Joan are charged with murder in a common law jurisdiction which states: "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being by another with malice aforethought". Their worst defense to the charge is that:

They were pursuing a constitutionally protected religious belief.

Ty was an electrician, one of many workers who were working for a general contractor on a very big construction project, the construction of a large civic auditorium. One day, when Ty was installing a very large and heavy light fixture in the central hallway of the building under construction, he did a very sloppy and slipshod job of securing the fixture to the ceiling.A co-worker, Amy, who was helping him attach the fixture, both of them high above the floor on a scaffold, told him: "Hey, Ty, that light's gonna fall. You got to at least support it better somehow before we secure it or somebody's gonna get conked pretty good when it lets go." "Nah," Ty replied, "don't worry about it. I know it's loose. I know. I know. But it's good enough for tonight. I got to get home. I got something to do. I don't have the time to work on this any more today. We'll get it fixed up right tomorrow morning." Soon thereafter, Ty and Amy left the work site without taking any additional steps to secure or support the light fixture.The next morning, as Ty and Amy were climbing the scaffolding to get back to the ceiling to resume work on the fixture, the fixture fell from the ceiling, crashing into and through the scaffolding, striking Amy forcefully on its way to the floor. Amy was critically injured, and she subsequently died from the injuries she received as a result of being struck directly by the fixture and her subsequent fall to the floor.Ty has been charged with involuntary manslaughter in the death of Amy. Which of the following is true:

Ty is likely guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of Amy because he was criminally negligent in not repairing the fixture before he left for the evening.

Tyrone and his girlfriend, Faye, went to a club to celebrate Jeffrey's birthday, where they both drank heavily. Tyrone got into a fight outside of the club, and one of his punches landed on Faye's face. Faye told Tyrone that she did not want him to live in her apartment any longer, and that he would have to leave. She left the club with Jeffrey and headed home. Tyrone was already there when Faye and Jeffrey arrived. Faye began to put Tyrone's possessions on the front porch, and she asked him to return her key, which he did.Tyrone was very upset at being thrown out of Faye's apartment. After awhile, Jeffrey was able to calm Tyrone down; but Tyrone and Faye continued to argue with one another. Soon thereafter, Marco drove up to wish Jeffrey a happy birthday. Marco told Tyrone to "chill out" and Tyrone responded that Marco should "stay out of it." An argument ensued and Tyrone told Marco to go get his guns, adding that he (Tyrone) had his. Faye went into a back bedroom, yelling, "Kill each other for all I care. Go ahead! Good riddance!"Marco went to his vehicle and retrieved two handguns. He approached the porch with his arms crossed and a gun in each hand. Tyrone took a gun out of the waistband of his pants and started shooting. He wounded Marco and he fatally shot Jeffrey. Shortly thereafter, Tyrone was arrested and placed in the back of a patrol car. As he was being driven to the police station, Tyrone spontaneously said: "I did not mean to kill Jeff. Jeff got in the way. Jeff is my best friend."You are a public defender in the jurisdiction where the facts set out above took place. Tyrone has been charged with the murder of Jeffrey in this modern common law jurisdiction. The Chief Public Defender has asked you what chances of success Tyrone may have in using an intoxication defense to that charge. Which of the following is most accurate:

Tyrone is not likely to be able to successfully defend against a murder charge based on intoxication.

Tyrone and his girlfriend, Faye, went to a club to celebrate Jeffrey's birthday, where they both drank heavily. Tyrone got into a fight outside of the club, and one of his punches landed on Faye's face. Faye told Tyrone that she did not want him to live in her apartment any longer, and that he would have to leave. She left the club with Jeffrey and headed home. Tyrone was already there when Faye and Jeffrey arrived. Faye began to put Tyrone's possessions on the front porch, and she asked him to return her key, which he did.Tyrone was very upset at being thrown out of Faye's apartment. After awhile, Jeffrey was able to calm Tyrone down; but Tyrone and Faye continued to argue with one another. Soon thereafter, Marco drove up to wish Jeffrey a happy birthday. Marco told Tyrone to "chill out" and Tyrone responded that Marco should "stay out of it." An argument ensued and Tyrone told Marco to go get his guns, adding that he (Tyrone) had his. Faye went into a back bedroom, yelling, "Kill each other for all I care. Go ahead! Good riddance!"Marco went to his vehicle and retrieved two handguns. He approached the porch with his arms crossed and a gun in each hand. Tyrone took a gun out of the waistband of his pants and started shooting. He wounded Marco and he fatally shot Jeffrey. Shortly thereafter, Tyrone was arrested and placed in the back of a patrol car. As he was being driven to the police station, Tyrone spontaneously said: "I did not mean to kill Jeff. Jeff got in the way. Jeff is my best friend."You are a public defender in the jurisdiction where the facts set out above took place. Tyrone has been charged with the first degree murder of Jeffrey in this State's statute. Which of the following is most accurate:

Tyrone is not likely to be found guilty of first degree murder because a reasonable jury is not likely to conclude that he premeditated and deliberated this killing act.

As part of her new landscaping, Rita had a wood-burning fire pit installed at the back of her property, close to the wooden fence that separates her lot from a neighbor. On a chilly evening in early October, she left the fire unattended and went into the house to answer the telephone. While she was inside, a strong wind came up and suddenly sparks from the fire pit blew onto the wooden fence. The fence caught fire, and the fire quickly spread to Rita's neighbor's house, which nearly burned to the ground before the fire department got the blaze under control. Rita has been charged with arson, which requires, in this jurisdiction, a showing of purpose to commit the offense. Which of the following best describes what the prosecutor must prove to convict Rita of this offense?

When she left the fire unattended, Rita consciously meant to burn her neighbor's house down

Bonnie was driving her BMW convertible down a suburban, residential street where the speed limit was 25 miles per hour.Bonnie was driving at 40 miles per hour—fifteen miles per hour over the speed limit—but she did not see anyone in, around, or near the street and the weather was good, so she saw no need or reason to slow down.Unfortunately, 7 year-old, Josiah, playing a game of hide-and-seek with some friends and not looking where he was going, dashed right out into the street in front of Bonnie's car. Bonnie didn't see Josiah until he was right in front of the car since he emerged from behind some dense foliage that grew right up to the edge of the roadway.Bonnie braked as soon as she saw Josiah, but it was already too late. She ran right over him. Josiah subsequently died of the internal injuries he suffered as a result of being struck and run over by Bonnie's car.Bonnie has been charged with involuntary manslaughter in the death of Josiah. Which of the following is true:

Whether Bonnie will be convicted of involuntary manslaughter on these facts turns on whether she should have been aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that death or serious bodily injury might occur as a result of her speeding in this residential neighborhood.

Jim invites friends over for a night of drinking. During the evening one of his drunk friends passed out, only to awaken to find his wife in bed with Jim. The "friend," in a fit of rage, lunged at Jim with a knife. Jim grabbed a gun from beneath his bed and shot the "friend" dead. Can D claim self-defense?

Yes D can claim self defense because lunging w knife

A computer programmer sent a computer virus anonymously via e-mail to a business. The programmer believed that the virus would just disable the business' email program for a short time without causing any additional damage, although he was aware that it very frequently caused widespread damage to the infected computer. However, because of a hidden bug in the business' e-mail program, the virus infected the computer's entire hard drive, eventually rendering it unusable. Not only did the business lose important data, it also had to replace the computer, at a cost of over $1000. The jurisdiction in which this occurred has a modern criminal code patterned after the Model Penal Code. One of this jurisdiction's statutes makes it a criminal offense to "knowingly cause over $200 in damage to another's personal property." Can the programmer be found guilty of violating the statute?

Yes, because the programmer knew that he was sending a virus to the business' e-mail program.

Sylvie was arrested by a local police officer for walking her dog, Trixie, in a park near her home without Trixie being on a leash. The criminal statute under which she was arrested provides that "[n]o dog shall be permitted except on leash within any park or wildlife management area except in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by the Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources, and whoever shall be the owner of any dog at large within any park or wildlife management area, knowing that this conduct is unlawful, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor." When she was arrested, Sylvie told the arresting officer that she did not know that she needed to have Trixie on a leash. The officer responded, "I'm sorry, but that's irrelevant, ma'am. Ignorance of the law is no defense." Assuming that Sylvie's statement that she did not know that she needed to have Trixie on a leash is truthful, is that a defense in a Model Penal Code jurisdiction?

Yes, it is a good defense

Jim unlawfully throws a punch at Frank but Frank escalates the fight by pulling a gun on Jim. Does Jim now have the right to kill Frank?

yes has a right to kill bc frank escalated the force