your Question Coming house. home 1 is based at 3:00 upon a.m. the from following an alcohol-infused facts. party, you find a man lying in a heap outside
no obligation He to is clearly in pain and bleeding from his wrist. You don't know the man and have
laying him help him. Nonetheless, you drag him up your driveway and into your house,
drop dead into your bed and into a deep sleep. When you wake up the next afternoon, you find the you man
on his back on the couch with a pillow under his head. Completely exhausted,
in a pool of blood.
It turns out that the man would have lived if you had called 911 even as late as 10:00 a.m.
morning. Given that there is heavy traffic outside your house each day of the week, there is little
doubt that someone else would have seen him. Also, a police patrol cruised by your house several
times between 4:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m.
1. Are you criminally liable for the man's death?
(b) No, because there was no status relationship from which a duty to aid could have arisen.
(c) No, because you were not contractually obligated to help.
(d) Both B and C.
Question 2 is based upon the following facts.
Suppose the legislature passes the following statute:
Whoever knowingly sells a controlled substance within 1000 feet of a school shall be
guilty of a felony.
2. To what element(s) do you think the "knowingly" state of mind applies?
(a) Defendant must knowingly sell
(b) Defendant must knowingly sell what he/she knows is a controlled substance
(c) Defendant must knowingly sell what he/she knows is a controlled substance and must
know he/she is selling within 1000 feet of a school
(d) None of the above.
Question 3 is based upon the following facts.
Kevin intended to kill Jessica. He came upon her in Jurisdiction A and stabbed her several times.
Believing she was dead, Kevin wrapped Jessica's body in a blanket and put it in his trunk. Then
he drove to Jurisdiction B.
Later it is determined that Jessica was not dead when Kevin loaded her into the trunk; rather, she
was critically wounded. Jessica died in the trunk of the car in Jurisdiction B about 6 hours after
the stabbings. The cause of death was blood loss from the injuries inflicted on her in Jurisdiction
3. Can Kevin be convicted of murder?
(a) Yes, in Jurisdiction A because there is concurrence of the actus reus and mens rea in that
(b) Yes, in Jurisdiction B because there is concurrence of the actus reus and mens rea in that
(c) Yes, the courts of either jurisdiction can convict Kevin of murder.
(d) No, because there is no concurrence of actus reus and mens rea in either Jurisdiction A or
Question Bill 4 is based upon the following facts.
business was angry at his live-in girlfriend, Lynn, so he decided to kill her. While she was on a
home. A trip, couple he days put arsenic later, in her favorite soda expecting that she would drink it upon her return
soda. However, Lynn came Bill home had early a change and drank of heart the and soda decided he'd throw out the poisoned
effects became of very sick. Bill obtained the best medical help he could before buy he in could hopes dispose of reversing of it. Lynn the
adverse effects of arsenic on her vital organs.
the poison, but it was too late. Lynn died four days after drinking the poison from the
4. Can Bill be convicted of murder?
(a) Yes, because his act of putting the poison in the soda concurred with the intent to kill and
the later acts are irrelevant to his criminal liability.
(b) No, because his change of heart prevented him from having the requisite state of mind
the time Lynn drank the poison.
(c) No, because his attempts to avoid the harm from his act prevent a finding of concurrence
on these facts.
(d) No, but he can be convicted of involuntary manslaughter.
Question 5 is based upon the following facts.
Barb buys what she thinks may be stolen stamps. She shows the stamps to her friend Erik, who
says they look strange. Erik offers to have his aunt, who works for the post office, look at the
stamps. Although Barb thinks they look OK, she agrees to let Erik show his aunt just to make
sure. They take the stamps to Erik's aunt and Barb hands them over to her. As soon as she looks
at the stamps, Erik's aunt realizes they are counterfeit. She tells this to Barb and immediately
places her under arrest. It turns out Erik's aunt is a postal inspector as opposed to a post office
employee and it is part of her job to investigate stolen and counterfeit stamps.
5. Can Barb be convicted of either of the following crimes?
Possession of stolen stamps: Whoever knowingly possesses stolen stamps shall be guilty of a
Possession of counterfeit stamps: Whoever knowingly possesses counterfeit stamps shall be
guilty of a felony.
(a) Possession of stolen stamps only.
(b) Possession of counterfeit stamps only.
(c) Neither possession of stolen stamps nor possession of counterfeit stamps.
(d) Both possession of stolen stamps and possession of counterfeit stamps.
Question 6 is based upon the following facts.
Heather planned on taking some rare coins that Mark keeps in his office safe, so she scheduled a
meeting with him. When he stepped out of his office, she poured a drug concoction into his
coffee intending for it to knock him out. Mark passed out and Heather took the coins. Because
Heather had miscalculated the dosage of drugs in the mix, Mark died.
6. What is the most serious offense Heather can be charged with?
(a) Grand Larceny.
(b) Involuntary Manslaughter.
(c) Voluntary Manslaughter.
Question 7 is based upon the following facts.
During the busy holiday shopping season, an anti-capitalist extremist entered a ritzy fashion
boutique and screamed: "Your products stink and so do you!" Maddie, the extremist, set off a
stink bomb and darted out of the store. As she ran out, Maddie rushed past Lila who was entering
the shop, passing about six inches in front of her. Lila was surprised, which caused her to trip and
hit her head on the sidewalk. Maddie was quickly taken into custody and charged with disorderly
conduct and assault against Lila.
7. Which of the following represents Maddie's best defense to the assault charge?
(a) Lila's injury was not a foreseeable consequence of Maddie's criminal activity at the
(b) Maddie lacked the requisite mens rea.
(c) The underlying offense was a misdemeanor as opposed to a felony.
(d) Maddie made no physical contact with Lila.
Question 8 is based upon the following facts.
Ben rented a room at the Super Inn Hotel for two nights. The room had a large color TV which
Ben found too enticing to resist. He stole and pawned the TV set, pocketing the money. To hide
the fact that he was the thief, Ben trashed the hotel room to make it appear as if it had been
burglarized. But Ben was traced through the pawnbroker and arrested.
8. What is Ben guilty of?
(b) Larceny by trick
(c) False Pretenses
Question 9 is based upon the following facts.
Jack and Kent agreed to break into Bella's house and steal her first edition copies of Moby Dick
and The Old Man and the Sea. Shortly after prying the door open, both men were arrested. The
government charged them with conspiracy to commit larceny and other crimes. Kent testified that
he was suspicious that Jack was a thief and only agreed to the plan in order to catch Jack. Kent
also explained that he had anonymously called 911 and reported the crime, enabling police to
arrest them "in the act." Jack did not testify. The jurisdiction follows common law rules on
9. As to the charge of conspiracy to commit larceny, if the jury believes Kent, it should find him:
(a) Guilty, because there was an agreement and the prying open of the door was sufficient for
an overt act.
(b) Guilty, because he cannot claim a special privilege to apprehend criminals.
(c) Not guilty, because he did not intend to steal.
(d) Not guilty, because he prevented the theft from occurring.
Question 10 is based upon the following facts.
Bob stabbed Karen, who was eight months pregnant, in the stomach and chest. She died almost
immediately. Her unborn child was dead when delivery was attempted at the hospital. The knife
severed the umbilical cord and cut off oxygen to the boy.
10. Is Bob likely to be found criminally liable for the death of the child?
(a) No, because the child did not live on his own prior to death.
(b) No, because injury to a fetus can never support a charge of homicide.
(c) Yes, since the child was in a position that indicated he would soon be born.
(d) Yes, since the child was viable and could have survived outside the mother's body.
Question 11 is based upon the following facts.
11. If we punish those who attempt to cause the death of another (i.e., attempted murder), which
one of the following mens rea levels should be required before we punish conduct that could have
caused, but did not cause, a death?
12. In which of the following situations is the Defendant most likely to be found guilty of
(a) Unreasonably mistaking Jen's car for his own, Defendant got into Jen's car in a parking
lot and drove it home.
(b) Mistakenly believing that larceny does not include the taking of a dog, Defendant took his
neighbor's dog and sold it.
(c) Defendant went into Tim's house and took $100 in the belief that Tim had caused that
amount of damage to Defendant's car.
Defendant took Sally's TV, with the intention of returning it the next day. But he dropped
it and damaged it beyond repair.
13. Which if the following is most likely to be found a strict liability offense?
(a) A state statute making it a felony to register a firearm.
(b) A federal statute making it a felony to possess heroin.
(c) A city ordinance providing for a fine of not more than $200 for shoplifting.
(d) A state statute making the sale of adulterated milk a misdemeanor.
14. Of the following circumstances, in which scenario is it most likely that the named defendant
would be found not guilty of larceny?
(a) Kari, needing a ride to work, hot wires her neighbor's car and drives it into town. She
intends to drive the car back after work and return it to the neighbor who is away on
(b) Reggie, who learned that an accountant had embezzled $80,000 from his employer, went
to the accountant's apartment and took the cash with the intent of spending it on a
weekend in Las Vegas.
(c) Jess is moving permanently to Libya and asked an acquaintance if she could borrow a
backpack and a bracelet. Jess immediately leaves for Libya after obtaining the backpack
(d) Upon leaving class, Craig sees another student's bike leaning against the building.
Without the owner's knowledge or permission, Craig rides away on the bike, intending to
15. (a) In which Not of the following situations is Defendant least likely to be found guilty of murder?
intending to kill, Defendant commits a robbery. He pushes the store clerk who falls,
strikes her head on the counter, and dies.
(b) Not intending to kill, Defendant drops bricks from the top of a tall building into the crowd
below. One brick strikes and kills a passerby.
(c) Not intending to kill, Defendant while at a party pushes a 10-year-old child into the
swimming pool and the boy drowns.
(d) Not intending to kill, Defendant hits a woman in the head with a baseball bat. She dies
from her injury.
Question 16 is based upon the following facts.
Paul has had a history of epileptic seizures over the past 5 years. Every time he has a seizure, it
comes without warning. One day, driving into town, he had a seizure. Paul lost control of the car
and hit a pedestrian who was lawfully crossing the street. As the injuries were severe, the
pedestrian dies in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. Paul is charged with involuntary
16. He will most likely be found:
(a) Not guilty, because he had not intent to harm anyone.
(b) Not guilty, because his failure to control the car was not a voluntary act.
(c) Guilty, because the law presumes that a person intends the natural and probable
consequences of his acts.
(d) Guilty, because he knowingly and recklessly chose to drive his car.
17. In which of the following situations is the defendant most likely to be guilty of larceny?
(a) Mistakenly believing that larceny only involves the taking of items that are $100 or more
in value, Defendant takes his neighbor's swing-set worth $75 and sells it to a friend.
(b) Defendant took Cliff's car with the intention of returning it the next day. But Defendant
was in a car accident and the car was totaled before he could return it.
(c) Wishing to collect a long outstanding debt, Defendant went into Betty's house and took
$60, the amount owed to him.
(d) Unreasonably mistaking another man's jacket as his own, Defendant takes it from the coat
rack and walks off wearing it.
Question 18 is based upon the following facts.
Bill's wife was terribly ill with cancer and had degenerated to the point that she spent all her time
in bed in a semi-comatose state. Doctors had told Bill that she was beyond medical treatment. Bill
decided to try treating her himself with various poisons that he hoped would attack the cancer
cells, resulting in her recovery. Bill experimented with administering several toxic poisons to his
wife. Three days later, Bill's wife died. The autopsy established the cause of death as cancer.
18. If Bill is prosecuted for the murder of his wife, the best he reason he would be acquitted is:
(a) He was trying to save her life.
(b) Medical science had given her up for dead.
(c) He did not cause her death.
(d) He did not have the requisite malice to be convicted of murder.
Question Valerie 19 is based upon the following facts.
attack. With was exiting a store when she saw Lenny fall to ground having what appeared to be a heart
taking her her attention focused on Lenny, she was unaware that his accomplice, Shane, was
quickly turned and grabbed Shane by the sleeve. Shane broke free and began to run away, still
wallet out of her purse. A passerby yelled out to Valerie to "Be careful!" Valerie
clutching Valerie's wallet. Shane tripped over a fire hydrant, falling and dropping Valerie's
wallet. Valerie was able to grab her wallet before Lenny and Shane escaped.
19. The most serious charge that Shane could be charged with is:
(a) Attempted larceny.
(c) Larceny by trick.
Question 20 is based upon the following facts.
Perry is charged with burglarizing Ruth's home. Evidence presented at Perry's trial indicates that
he talked Stella into assisting him. The jury is instructed on the provisions of the Criminal Code
of that jurisdiction relating to burglary, solicitation, conspiracy, and attempt.
20. If Perry is found by the jury to be guilty of burglary:
(a) He may also be found guilty of conspiracy, but not of solicitation or attempt.
(b) He also may be found guilty of solicitation or attempt but not both, and he may not be
found guilty of conspiracy.
(c) He may also be found guilty of conspiracy and solicitation, but not of attempt.
(d) He also may be found guilty of conspiracy or solicitation but not both, and he may be
found guilty of attempt.
Question 21 is based upon the following facts.
Andy and Bruce are throwing snowballs at each other during a winter storm. Chuck is walking
by and is not part of the snowball fight. Chuck slips on the ice and slides in between the snowball
fight and gets hit in the head by a snowball thrown by Bruce. Chuck is angry and wants Bruce
21. What crime(s) can Bruce be arrested for?
(a) assault and battery
(d) none of the above
Question 22 is based upon the following facts.
Allison is eating dinner at a restaurant and is annoyed because Becky is talking too loud on her
cell phone. Allison walks over to Becky's table and politely asks Becky to lower her voice or go
outside to finish the call. Becky gets irate and stands up and swings her fist at Allison. Allison
quickly reacts and steps out of the way. Becky misses Allison but hits Cindy, the waitress
serving drinks at another table.
22. What crimes have been committed here?
(a) Battery on Cindy via transferred intent because Becky had criminal intent when he tried
to punch Allison.
(b) Assault on Allison when Becky swung at but missed Allison because Allison was aware
of the action by Becky.
(c) No crimes because Becky did not intend on hitting Allison.
(d) Both A and B above.
23. Identify the inchoate crimes below:
(a) Attempt, solicitation, theft
(b) Solicitation, conspiracy
(c) Conspiracy, theft, attempt
(d) Attempt, conspiracy, solicitation
Question 24 is based upon the following facts.
Alfred and Bonnie are drinking beer on the back patio of their home. Connie and Donald live
next door and go to bed early in the evening but they always leave their backdoor unlocked.
Alfred wants to show Bonnie a new dance move and turns up the music so they can dance in the
yard. Connie yells out her bedroom window and asks Alfred to turn the music down. Alfred
ignores her request and continues drinking and dancing. Donald grabs his gun and points it at
Bonnie and tells Alfred that if he does not turn down the music he will shoot Bonnie. Alfred and
Bonnie did not know that Donald's gun was not loaded.
Meanwhile, Connie calls 911 to report loud music being played. Donald and Connie go back to
sleep and are awoken by Alfred pointing a gun at them. Bonnie remained at home because she
was so frightened by Donald's actions. Donald and Connie jump out of bed and run out of the
house and Alfred chases them into the street. As Alfred is chasing them, the police arrive in
response to the 911 call and hit Connie with their police car. Donald sees this and turns to Alfred
and starts punching him. Alfred shoots Donald to stop Donald from punching him. Bonnie hears
the gunshots and runs out of her house. Alfred misses Donald and the bullet hits Bonnie. Connie
and Bonnie both die from their injuries.
24. What crimes have occurred here?
(a) Donald is guilty of assault for pointing a gun at Bonnie. Alfred is guilty of burglary and
assault for entering Connie and Donald's home and pointing a gun at them.
(b) Alfred is guilty of murder of Connie and Bonnie.
(c) Donald is guilty of assault for pointing a gun at Bonnie. Alfred is guilty of burglary and
assault for entering Connie and Donald's home and pointing a gun at them. Donald is
guilty of battery of Alfred. Alfred is guilty of murder of Connie and Bonnie.
(d) Alfred is guilty of burglary and assault for entering Connie and Donald's home and
pointing a gun at them.
Questions 25-31 are based upon the following facts.
Daphne and Conrad have been married for 5 years. Conrad drinks too much and hits Daphne
when he gets drunk. Daphne is at a bar drinking and telling the bartender about her marriage
problems. Earnest overhears her story and asks her if she wants his help. Earnest offers Daphne
to kill Conrad in exchange for $100. Daphne laughs and accepts his offer although she does not
believe Earnest was sincere. Earnest spends the rest of the evening drinking with Daphne and
they go back to his house and spend the night together. When Daphne wakes up in the morning
Earnest is not at home, so she goes home. When she arrives at home she finds that her back door
has been pried open and Conrad is dead on the kitchen floor. Earnest is standing over Conrad
with a knife and asks Daphne for the $100. Daphne explains to Earnest that she did not think he
was serious and did not want Conrad killed. Earnest becomes upset and demands his money.
the grabs of the silverware in the kitchen to satisfy the $100 he is owed and follows Daphne out of
Daphne all runs back out of the house and runs to Wilma's house next door to call 911. Earnest
house. Wilma sees Daphne and Earnest running toward her house and is frightened. Wilma
grabs her gun and shouts, "Stop running or 1 will shoot you." Daphne sees Earnest following her
with the knife and keeps running. Wilma shoots her gun in the air to give a warning shot. The
bullet ricochets off a tree branch and hits Daphne killing her. Stacy was walking her dog and sees
Daphne get shot and calls 911 from her cell phone. Wilma panics and locks herself in her house.
Stacy waits in the street and tells the police what she saw when they arrive. The police knock on
Wilma's door and demand she surrender herself. Wilma refuses to come out and starts shooting
at the police. She misses the police and hits Stacy killing her.
25. Did Earnest and Daphne commit conspiracy to commit murder?
(a) Yes, they both agreed to kill Conrad.
(b) No, Daphne was not serious and did not believe Earnest was sincere.
(c) No, there was no one step in furtherance of this conspiracy.
(d) Yes, when they spent the night together it consummated the agreement.
26. Did Earnest commit Burglary?
(a) Yes, under both common law and MPC.
(b) No, under common law, but yes under MPC.
(c) Yes, under common law, but no under MPC.
(d) No under common law and MPC.
27. Did Earnest commit larceny?
(a) No, he was owed the money for payment for the deal.
(b) No, he was taking the silverware instead of taking cash.
(c) Yes, he was not entitled to take the silverware instead of taking cash.
(d) Yes, there was never an agreement to give him money.
28. Is Wilma guilty of anything for the death of Daphne?
(a) No, she was acting in self defense.
(b) Yes, she had no reasonable belief she was in harm.
(c) No, she fired a warning shot and did not intend to hit anyone.
(d) Yes, she acted with reckless behavior when she fired a warning shot.
29. What if anything is Wilma guilty of for the death of Daphne?
(a) She is not guilty of any crimes.
(b) She is guilty of manslaughter for the unintentional killing.
(c) She is guilty of murder for her reckless behavior.
(d) Both C and D.
30. Is Earnest responsible for Daphne's death?
(a) Yes, he was chasing her with a knife.
(b) No, he did no shoot the gun.
(c) No, Wilma was acting in self defense.
(d) Yes, he should have known Wilma would over react.
31. Is Wilma guilty of anything for the death of Stacy?
(a) No, she was acting in self defense.
(b) No, she did not intend to shoot Stacy.
(c) Yes, via transferred intent.
(d) Yes, it is illegal to shoot at the police.
Question 32 is based upon the following facts.
Ricardo medication has a medical disorder that asleep instantly. required
causes him to fall Ricardo is to take
to be to prevent this disorder. He has not been taking his medication because it causes him
very thirsty. One day he was driving his car and fell asleep at the wheel. His car swerved in
traffic and hit another car killing the driver.
32. Is Ricardo guilty of anything?
(a) No, he did not intend to kill anyone.
(b) Yes, he knew or should have known his actions would create a foreseeable risk of harm.
(c) No, he is suffering from a medical disorder.
(d) Yes, he acted with wanton disregard for the safety of others when he drove without his
33. In order to prove a strict liability crime, you must prove:
(a) That the Defendant committed the proscribed act regardless of his intent.
(b) That the Defendant committed the proscribed act with the intent to commit a crime.
(c) That the Defendant committed the proscribed act unless he did not know he was
committing a crime.
(d) None of the above.
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.