Criminal Law Quiz #1 Spring 2016 Behzad Mirhashem

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Criminal Law Quiz #1 Spring 2016 Behzad Mirhashem"

Asher Woods
5 years ago
Views:

1 Criminal Law Quiz #1 Spring 2016 Behzad Mirhashem Student # General Instructions: 1. Do not write your name anywhere on this exam. Write only the number provided to you by the Registrar in the space provided above. 2. This is a closed book/notes/etc. quiz. You may not access any materials other than the quiz itself while you are taking the quiz. 3. You should either write your answer on the quiz in the provided space, or type it into that same space, or type it on an attached sheet using no more space than is available if you were writing the answer directly on the quiz. 4. While the quiz will be graded primarily based on the substance of your responses, the conciseness and clarity of your responses will be also considered. 5. This quiz, which constitutes 15% of your grade, consists of six questions. Each question will be graded out of 2.5 points, for a total possible score of 15 points. Good luck! 1

2 1. A state statute provides for the punishment upon conviction of any person who drives a vehicle on a way at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing. (A) What constitutional challenge might your raise against this statute if your client, who was driving 50 MPH on a rural highway on February 1, 2016, has been charged with violating the statute? Briefly explain your answer. (B) Suppose you are successful in your challenge to the statute and the case against your client is dismissed. The state legislature then passes a law that provides for the punishment upon conviction of any person who drives a motor vehicle upon a rural highway at a speed great than 45 miles per hour. The statute provides a definition for rural highway. Can the state successfully prosecute your client for violating this statute on February 1, 2016? Briefly explain your answer. 2. In the middle of a heated argument, John slaps his father, who falls back, hits his head on the floor, and dies. John is convicted of negligent homicide. At sentencing, the judge addresses John as follows, I am imposing the maximum sentence under the law ten years in prison. This was a particularly horrible crime because you did this to your own father. I hope everyone out there understands that if they come before this Court and are found guilty of such a crime, they too will receive the maximum sentence. On which justification(s) for punishment is the judge relying in imposing the maximum sentence? 2

3 3. Cindy and Mindy go deer hunting together. Cindy notices a deer some distance behind Mindy. Cindy shoots, intending to kill the deer, but hits and kills Mindy instead. Is Cindy guilty of murder under a statute which provides, A person is guilty of murder if he knowingly causes the death of another? Explain your answer. You should include in your answer a discussion of whether the concept of transferred intent applies in this case. 4. A statute provides that a person is guilty of assault if he causes physical injury to another. (A) Interpreted literally, does this statute define a strict liability offense? Provide a brief explanation, including a definition of strict liability. (B) Are courts likely to construe this statute to define a strict liability offense? Explain your answer. 3

4 5. A statute defines burglary as follows, A person commits burglary if he knowingly enters the dwelling of another with the intent to commit a crime therein. One night Dan finds himself inside a neighbor s garage, which is located next to the neighbor s house, having apparently sleepwalked in there. Dan notices a shiny new lawnmower, which he decides to steal. As he is taking the lawnmower into his own garage, Dan is arrested for burglary. As Dan s attorney, list four separate arguments you would make to try to show that he is not guilty of burglary. 4

5 6. A statute provides as follows: Any person who knowingly damages the property of another is guilty of the misdemeanor offense of Criminal Mischief. A related statute provides, The term property of another includes property in which any person other than the actor has an interest which the actor is not privileged to infringe, regardless of the fact that the actor also has an interest in the property. The Criminal Code of this jurisdiction also contains the following provision: When the law defining an offense prescribes the mental state sufficient for the commission of an offense, without distinguishing among the material elements thereof, such provision shall apply to all material elements of the offense. Finally, the jurisdiction has adopted Section 2.04 of the Model Criminal Code, copied on the next page. Linda and her roommate/ boyfriend Tom bought a TV, each paying half the cost. A year later, in a moment of anger, Linda threw a bottle at the TV and broke the screen. (A) Suppose that at the time Linda threw the bottle, she thought that she had paid for the entire cost of the TV and owned the TV all by herself. Is Linda guilty of Criminal Mischief? (B) Now suppose instead that Linda remembered that Tom had paid half the cost of the TV, and therefore she believed he had an interest in the property, but, mistakenly, she also believed that, when two people live together, each of them has the right to destroy property in which they both have an interest. Is Linda guilty of Criminal Mischief? Consider sections (1)(a) and (3) of MPC 2.04 in answering part (B). 5

6 Section Ignorance or Mistake. (1) Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact or law is a defense if: (a) the ignorance or mistake negatives the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense; or (b) the law provides that the state of mind established by such ignorance or mistake constitutes a defense. (2) Although ignorance or mistake would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the defendant would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the defendant shall reduce the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be convicted to those of the offense of which he would be guilty had the situation been as he supposed. (3) A belief that conduct does not legally constitute an offense is a defense to a prosecution for that offense based upon such conduct when: (a) the statute or other enactment defining the offense is not known to the actor and has not been published or otherwise reasonably made available prior to the conduct alleged; or (b) he acts in reasonable reliance upon an official statement of the law, afterward determined to be invalid or erroneous, contained in (i) a statute or other enactment; (ii) a judicial decision, opinion or judgment; (iii) an administrative order or grant of permission; or (iv) an official interpretation of the public officer or body charged by law with responsibility for the interpretation, administration or enforcement of the law defining the offense. (4) The defendant must prove a defense arising under Subsection (3) of this Section by a preponderance of evidence. 6

Summer 2008 July 3, 2008 MID-TERM EXAM DO NOT GO BEYOND THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE TOLD TO BEGIN.

Professor DeWolf Criminal Law Summer 2008 July 3, 2008 MID-TERM EXAM Instructions DO NOT GO BEYOND THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE TOLD TO BEGIN. THIS EXAM WILL LAST 90 minutes. IT IS A CLOSED BOOK EXAM. If you