Criminal Law

Murder/VL/Inv, etc

100

The defendant knew that his neighbor, the victim, had a weak heart and that the victim had suffered several heart attacks in the past. Because he was angry at the victim, the defendant decided to try to frighten him into another heart attack. He watched the victim's house, and when he saw the victim leaving through the front door, he ran toward him shouting, "Look out! Look out! The sky is falling!" Although the defendant was not sure that this would kill the victim, he hoped it would. When the victim saw the defendant running toward him shouting, he became frightened, had a heart attack, and died on the spot. The jurisdiction has statutes that define first degree murder as "the deliberate and premeditated killing of a human being," and second degree murder as "any unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought, except for a killing that constitutes first degree murder." In addition, its statutes adopt common law definitions of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Which of the following is the most serious crime of which the defendant can properly be convicted. a) First Degree Murder b) Second Degree Murder c) Voluntary Manslaughter d) Involuntary Manslaughter

First Degree Murder: A killing is intentional if the defendant desired or knew to a substantial degree of certainty that it would result from his or her act. A killing is deliberate and premeditated if the defendant was capable of reflecting upon it with a cool mind and did in fact do so. Since the defendant hoped for the victim's death, the killing was intentional. Since he reflected on it in advance with a cool mind, it was deliberate and premeditated.

200

At a New Year's party, the defendant got so drunk that she passed out. Unaware of what she was doing, she walked to her car in an unconscious state, got behind the wheel, and started the engine. Because she had left the car parked in gear, it lurched forward, striking a pedestrian who was standing in the roadway. The pedestrian died of his injuries later that night. Will she be convicted of murder?

No, murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought may consist of intent to kill, intent to cause great bodily harm, wanton and reckless disregard for human life, intent to commit a felony. Since the defendant was unconscious, she lacked any of the requisite intents. Since she did not know that she was starting her car, she did not act with a wanton reckless disregard for human life.

300

The defendant was charged with the attempted murder of the victim. If only one of the following facts or inferences were true, which would be most likely to result in an acquittal? a) The victim was already dead when the defendant shot him, although the defendant believed that believed him to be alive. b) The victim was alive when the defendant shot him, although the defendant believed that the victim was already dead. c) The defendant's gun was unloaded when he aimed it at the victim and pulled the trigger, although the defendant believed it to be loaded.

B - A person is guilty of a criminal intent when, with the specific intent to bring a criminally prohibited result, he or she comes substantially close to achieving that result. Thus, all attempts, are "specific intent" crimes. Although murder may be committed without the intent to kill, attempted murder may not. If the defendant believed that the victim was already dead, he could not have intended to kill him and so could not be guilty of attempted murder.

400

Angry because her coworker had insulted her, the defendant decided to get revenge. Because she worked for an exterminator, the defendant had access to cans of a poison that was often used to kill termites and other insects. She did not want to kill the coworker, so she carefully read the user manual supplied by the manufacturer. The manual said that the gas was not fatal to human beings, but that exposure to it could cause serious ailments, including blindness and permanent respiratory irritation. When she was sure no one would see her, the defendant brought a can of the gas to the parking lot and released the poison gas into the coworker's car. At lunchtime the coworker and his friend sat together in the car. As a result of their exposure to the gas in the car, the friend died, and the coworker became so ill that he was hospitalized for over a month. If the defendant is charged with the murder of the friend, she should be found: a) guilty because the friend's death resulted from an act that the defendant performed with the intent to cause great bodily harm to a human being. b) not guilty because she did not know that the friend would be exposed to the poison gas. c) not guilty because she did not intend to cause the death of any person.

Murder is the unjustified killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought includes the intent to cause great bodily harm to a human being. A defendant intends a particular consequence if he or she desires or knows to a substantial degree of certainty that it will occur. Since the defendant desired/knew that exposure to the gas was likely to result in great bodily harm to the coworker, she intended to cause great bodily harm to a human being. Since the friend died, the defendant may be found guilty of murder. (a) is therefore correct.

500

The defendant shot the victim to death. She was subsequently charged with voluntary manslaughter. Which of the following additional facts, if true, would lead to an acquittal on that charge? a) at the time of the shooting, the defendant believed that the victim was going to stab her, but the reasonable person in her place would not have held that belief. b) at the time of the shooting, the reasonable person in the defendant's place would have believed that the victim was going to stab the defendant, but the defendant did not hold that belief. c) at the time of the shooting, the defendant did not know whether the victim was going to stab her. d) at the time of the shooting, the defendant mistakenly, but reasonably, believed that the victim was going to stab her.

One who intentionally kills another under the mistaken but reasonable belief that he or she was defending himself or herself against imminently bodily harm may be protected by the privilege of self-defense and therefore be found not guilty of any criminal homicidal manslaughter, although not of murder. Therefore, D is correct.

Defenses???

100

Mistake of Fact?

Defendant does not have the necessary MENS REA for the crime because the defendant made a mistake or was ignorant of a fact she had to know to be guilty of the charged offense.

200

What two insanity defenses are we being tested on? Can you define them?

M'Naghten Test: Defendant is presumed to be sane. However, to prove insanity, defendant must demonstrate that at the commission of the crime, defendant was laboring under a defect/disease of the mind and did not KNOW the nature or quality of his acts or that his acts were wrong. MPC Standard: Defendant is relieved from responsibility under two circumstances: 1. Defendant lacks substantial capacity to appreciate criminality (wrongfulness) of her conduct; or 2. Defendant lacks substantial capacity to conform conduct to the requirements of the law.

300

In which of the following situations is the defendant's claim of intoxication most likely to result in his or her being found not guilty? a) In a jurisdiction that applies the common law definition, the defendant is charged with involuntary manslaughter for the death of a pedestrian whom she struck while driving an automobile. The defendant asserts that at the time of the accident she was soo drunk that she did not see the pedestrian in the roadway. b) In a jurisdiction in which statutory age of consent is 18, the defendant is charged with statutory rape after having sexual intercourse with a female who was 17 years of age. The defendant asserts that he was so intoxicated that he did not realize he was engaging in sexual intercourse. c) In a jurisdiction that applies the common law definition, the defendant is charged with murder for the death of a person whom she struck with her automobile. The defendant asserts that, without her knowledge, an unknown person put alcohol in her fruit juice, as a result of which became so intoxicated that she could not see clearly or control the movements of her hands and feet. She further asserts that, unaware that she was drunk, she believed that the visual and physical difficulties to be the result of illness and was attempting to drive to a hospital when the accident occurred. d) In a jurisdiction that applies the common law definition, the defendant is charged with voluntary manslaughter after killing his wife. He asserts that he was so drunk that he imagined that he saw another man in bed with her, and that he killed her in the drunken rage that resulted.

B - No liability can be imposed, however, unless the defendant had intent to engage in intercourse.

400

Elements of Self-Defense - Use of Deadly Force?

An honest and reasonable fear of death; From an imminent and unlawful threat; With Proportional response to that threat; & defendant was not the initial aggressor (it is possible that the defendant be the initial aggressor, yet if they backed off, and the other party continues, then the aggressor can claim self-defense)

500

Frankie is a member of the Sharks gang. He hears that members of the rival Jets gang will be meeting at a particular park. Knowing that he would be unwelcome in the park, Frankie nonetheless goes to that location. True to their colors, the rival gang threatens Frankie with deadly force, to which he responds by killing one of the Jets. Is Frankie entitled to self-defense?

Yes, because he was threatened with deadly force.

Miscellaneous

100

Define Involuntary Manslaughter

The standard of involuntary manslaughter is criminal negligence. There is a gross deviation from what a reasonable person would do. Defendant does not realize the risk, but a reasonable person in defendant's situation would have.

200

The defendant lost her job and needed to make some money quickly. While visiting a local tavern, she ran into an old friend. When the defendant told the friend about her financial problems, the friend pointed to an expensive-looking coat that was hanging on a coat rack and said, "Why don't you steal the coat? It looks like you should be able to sell it for at least $100" Because the defendant said she was afraid the owner of the coat would see her, the friend agreed to sing in a loud voice to create a diversion so that the defendant could steal the coat while everyone was watching the friend. As soon as the friend began to sing, the defendant took the coat from the coat rack and ran from the tavern. In fact, the coat actually belonged to the friend, who had been joking when he told the defendant to steal it. Which of the following crimes may the defendant be properly convicted? Larceny? Conspiracy? Both? Neither?

Neither. Larceny is defined as the trespassory taking and carrying away of personal property of another with the intent to permanently deprive them of their personal property. A taking is trespassory if it violates the rights of the owner. Since the coat was the friend's and since the friend told the defendant to take the coat, the taking did not violate the friend's right.

300

Angry because her coworker had insulted her, the defendant decided to get revenge. Because she worked for an exterminator, the defendant had access to cans of a poison that was often used to kill termites and other insects. She did not want to kill the coworker, so she carefully read the user manual supplied by the manufacturer. The manual said that the gas was not fatal to human beings, but that exposure to it could cause serious ailments, including blindness and permanent respiratory irritation. When she was sure no one would see her, the defendant brought a can of the gas to the parking lot and released the poison gas into the coworker's car. At lunchtime the coworker and his friend sat together in the car. As a result of their exposure to the gas in the car, the friend died, and the coworker became so ill that he was hospitalized for over a month. If defendant is charged with attempted murder of the coworker, she should be found:

Not guilty - because she did not intent to cause the death of any person.

400

Victim was addicted to heroin and frequently committed acts of prostitution to obtain the money she needed to buy drugs. One night, she was out looking for customers to for prostitution when she was approached by defendant, who asked what her price was. When she told him that she would have intercourse with him for $20, he said that he had no money. She told him to get out or she would call the police. The defendant took a knife from his pocket, saying that if she did not have intercourse with him, he would kill her. Afterwards, when defendant fell asleep, victim beat him with a lamp. If defendant is charged with rape, the court should find him:

Guilty. Under common law, rape is committed when defendant intentionally has sexual intercourse with a female, not his wife, without his consent. Although it is necessary that the victim be unwilling, it is not necessary for her to put up a fight if it would be futile for her to do so or if she reasonably believes that resisting will cause her to sustain serious injury. Since victim's refusal was overcome by a threat that would have led a reasonable person in her place to fear for her life, the intercourse was without her consent.

500

One two occasions in the recent past, thieves entered owner's tavern after closing time and stole several thousand dollars worth of liquor. In an attempt to protect himself against further thefts, owner began sleeping in the tavern at night with a loaded pistol. One night, while on his rounds, a police officer noticed that the owner's windows were open and climbed through to investigate. Hearing the sound of someone moving, owner stood up and cocked his pistol. When officer heard the sound and saw the outline of a person standing by the bar with a pistol in his hand, the officer shouted - Drop the gun or I'll shoot. The owner and the officer fired their pistols at each other. Each was struck. If officer is charged with attempted murder because of his shooting of the owner, his most effective defense will be:

Deadly force may be used by a police officer who reasonably believes that his or her life is in danger. Like private individuals, police officers are privileged to use reasonable force to protect themselves.

Class Terms?

100

When can you claim defense of others? Does this apply to fetuses?

MAY USE FORCE WHEN AND TO THE EXTENT THE PERSON HE IS AIDING WOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE. FOR FETUS: DEFENSE APPLIES ONLY IN CONTEXT OF ASSAULT TO THE MOTHER

200

What is Felony-Murder

Defendant kills victim during the commission of a felony

300

What are the three types of assistance under accomplice liability?

Physical; Psychological; and Omission (when you have a duty to act)

400

What is the Unequivocality/Res Ipsa Loquitor Test?

It is a common law test for attempt. Defendant's actions unambiguously demonstrate defendant's intent to commit a crime. If there is a lawful explanation for defendant's action, attempt has yet to be proven.

500

The defendant and two other men met while in prison and decided that when they were released, they would rob a bank together. Soon after their release, they planned the robbery, agreeing that the defendant would steal and drive the getaway car and that the two other men would commit the actual robbery. The defendant stole the car for the robbery and brought it to one of the men's house, but the day before the robbery, the defendant was arrested for violating the conditions of his parole and was returned to prison. The following day, the two other men went ahead with the plan, entering the bank and threatening to shoot the cashiers if they did not hand over all available cash. A teller pushed a button that alerted the police, and the two men were arrested before leaving the bank. What will the defendant be guilty of?

Attempted Robbery & Conspiracy to Commit Robbery. Co-conspirators are vicariously liable for the crimes committed in furtherance of the agreement.

Inchoate Crimes

100

A boy overheard two other boys talking about killing the victim by hiding his asthma medicine. The boy hoped that the other boys' plan would succeed. He decided to help them without saying anything about it. Going into the victim's room, the boy searched until he found the medicine. Then he put it on a night table so that the other boys would be sure to find it. One of the two boys decided not to go through with the plan and ran away. However, the other boy went to the room and threw away the medicine. The victim had an asthma attack and died. If the boy is charged with conspiracy, a court will probably find him: a) guilty, because he knowingly aided and abetted in the commission of a crime. b) guilty, because he committed an overt act in furtherance of an agreement to throw away the victims medicine. c) not guilty, because he did not agree to commit any crime d) not guilty, because one of the boys effectively withdrew from any conspiracy that existed.

C - not guilty, because he did not agree to commit any crime. A criminal conspiracy is an agreement to commit, and it is complete when two or more persons make such an agreement. Although the boy privately decided to assist the other boys in the commission of a crime, he did not agree with them that he would do so. He is therefore, and C is correct.

200

What is the Pinkerton Doctrine?

Each co-conspirator is responsible for: 1. Any reasonable foreseeable crime committed by a co-conspirator; 2. Committed in furtherance of the conspiracy.

300

If charging someone for a substantive crime under accomplice liability, what two states of mind are required?

Intent to assist primary party and Intent that the primary party commit the offense charged (purpose of assistance is to promote or facilitate in the commission of that crime)

400

Wylie works as a gasoline station attendant. There has been a rash of late afternoon bank robberies in the area. At 4:30 p.m. a car with no license plates and a driver dressed suspiciously pulls into the station. Although Wylie is fairly sure that the driver is the serial bank robber, he fills up the car with gas. The driver then proceeds to rob Security Pathetic Bank. Is Wylie guilty of the bank robbery?

No. Wylie's purpose in selling gas was not to facilitate robbery. His purpose was to earn money for the sale of gas.

500

In the course of robbing a bank, the defendant pointed a gun at three bank tellers and the bank manager and ordered them to go from the bank lobby to the back of the room while his confederate attempted to open the safe. Threatening to shoot them if they refused, he then ordered one of the bank tellers to undress and commanded the bank managers to have sexual intercourse with her. Fearful that they would be killed otherwise, the manager and teller obeyed the defendant's commands without protesting. What is the defendant guilty of? a. Solicitation to commit rape b. Rape c. Both solicitation to commit rape and rape d. Neither.

B - Rape. One who commands another to do an act is responsible for the criminal consequence thereof. Although the defendant himself did not have sexual intercourse with the teller, he is guilty of rape because he commanded the bank manager to do so. Soliciting is committed by encouraging, ordering, commanding another to commit a crime. If the person solicited actually commits the crime, solicitation merges with the substantive crime.