Blog

In Massachussetts v. Carlson (2006), the court found that the Defendant was liable for the deceased’s death even though she did not die on the scene and she later made the decision to refuse life saving measures. Which concept best explains why the Defendant was still held criminally responsible for her death?

For many years, Lacey has lived in the District of Concordia, where it is a felony “to harbor any prohibited wild animal” in a residential home. The list of prohibited wild animals includes ocelots. Notwithstanding the law, Lacey raises ocelots in her home and sells them to other ocelot-lovers. Lacey’s husband gets a transfer and they move to Kertucky, a state that also prohibits the harboring of wild animals in residential homes. Lacey knows of the Kertucky law; what she doesn’t know is that ocelots have recently been removed from Kertucky’s list of prohibited animals. “I know it’s risky,” she tells her husband, “but the ocelot business is good, and I’m going to keep it up.” Lacey builds ocelot cages in her new Kertucky home and makes arrangements for a friend to deliver newborn ocelots to her. Kertucky follows common law principles of attempt and recognizes “legal impossibility” as a limitation on attempt liability. Which statement best describes Lacey’s criminal liability in Kertucky?

In Kansas v. Morton (2004), two juries could not agree as to which theory of first degree murder the defendant was guilty. They both, however, agreed that the defendant was guilty of first degree murder. Although the court reversed the conviction for a different reason, why did the court rule a conviction could still stand even if the jury could not agree on one theory?

Which of the following is an example of an actus reus for which a person would not be criminally responsible?

In United States v. Mandujano, what specific actions or circumstances counted as the “substantial step” that allowed the defendant to be found liable for attempted heroin distribution, according to the Fifth Circuit?

Which of the following best describes the difference between the M’Naghten test and the ALI (American Law Institute) test for insanity?

 In Louisiana v. Booth, the court found the defendant guilty of constructive possession. Which of the following best summarizes the court’s rationale?

Police stop a car for speeding, then ask the driver and two passengers to step out of the car so they can search it. The police find methamphetamine under the rear seat. All occupants of the car deny knowing that the drug was there. Which of the following statements is accurate?

Justice Blackmun, in his dissenting opinion in US v. Bailey, wrote: “The rationale of the __________ defense is a balancing of harms. If the harm caused by an escape is less than the harm caused by remaining in a threatening situation, the prisoner’s initial departure is justified.” Which defense was he talking about?

Alex plans to rob a neighborhood pharmacy. After weeks of planning, Alex writes out a detailed checklist, gathers a ski mask, an unloaded handgun, and a bag to carry the stolen items. One evening, Alex walks to the pharmacy after closing time, puts on the mask, and tries the back door, which turns out to be locked. Just as Alex turns to leave, a police officer on patrol sees the suspicious behavior and arrests Alex. No property was taken, and no one was threatened. Analyze whether Alex is guilty of attempted robbery under the Model Penal Code.