Reference no: EM131369416

Question 1 : According to State v. McVey, the diminished capacity defense serves as a defense to what type of crime?

A Those crimes requiring specific intent as an essential element of the offense.

B Those crimes requiring malice as an essential element of the offense.

C Those crimes requiring recklessness as an essential element of the offense.

D Any crime requiring guilty knowledge as an essential element of the offense.

Question 2 : It is commonly held that:

A Voluntary intoxication is no defense to any crime

B Voluntary intoxication is no defense where the offense is of the general intent type but it may be properly asserted if the crime requires a specific intent.

C Voluntary intoxication may be asserted to negate the mens rea component of any crime.

D Due Process requires that defendant be permitted to introduce evidence of voluntary intoxication when charged with any crime.

Question 3 : Which of the following cases holds that involuntary intoxication can be an absolute defense if as a result of the intoxication the defendant is rendered legally insane at the time of the commission of the act?

A CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS v. ALTIMUS, 306 Minn. 462, 238 N.W.2d 851.(1976)

B MONTANA v. EGELHOFF, 518 U.S. 37, 116 S.Ct. 2013, 135 L.Ed.2d 361

C STATE v. Q.D., 102 Wash.2d 19, 685 P.2d 557 (1984)

D PEOPLE v. WALKER, 33 Ill.App.3d 681, 338 N.E.2d 449 (1975)

Question 4 : Involuntary Intoxication includes several different kinds of intoxication. These include:

A Coerced intoxication.

B Pathological intoxication.

C Intoxication by innocent mistake.

D All of the above.

Question 5 : A defendant in a criminal case, at the time he engaged in the conduct giving rise to the charges against him, may have been suffering from an abnormal mental condition that was not of a kind or character to afford him a successful insanity defense. In such a case, his mental condition:

A Is irrelevant and no evidence of it may be presented.

B Can be relevant to a mental state that is an element of the specific offense with which he is charged and evidence of mental condition must in such cases, therefore, be admitted.

C Can be relevant to a mental state that is an element of the specific offense, but, nonetheless, evidence of mental condition may not be admissible for some such specific offenses.

D Is relevant generally and evidence of mental condition must be permitted in all cases.

Question 6 : The majority of the courts that have held that evidence of mental condition not amounting to insanity is admissible have done so to allow a defendant to negate:

A Premeditation or deliberation required for conviction of first degree murder.

B Malice required for a conviction of murder of any degree.

C Knowing or consciousness required for proof of murder or manslaughter.

D The mens rea requirement for any crime.

Question 7 : If defendant formed the intention to commit a crime, and then drinks in order to gain the nerve to commit the crime and or to prepare himself for the defense of intoxication, then

A The defendant can claim the defense of intoxication if at the time the crime is committed he has become too intoxicated to form the requisite intent.

B The defendant cannot claim the defense of intoxication even if at the time the crime is committed he has become too intoxicated to form the requisite intent.

C The defendant can claim the defense of intoxication if the result of any tests to determine blood alcohol or other intoxicant levels is above the legal limits at the time the crime is committed.

D The defendant cannot claim the defense of intoxication unless at the time the crime is committed he has become too intoxicated to form the requisite intent.

Question 8 : The rule in the majority of cases in America regarding a defendant charged with a crime requiring the mental state of recklessness - an awareness of risk his conduct creates- but who is so intoxicated at the time of his conduct as to be unaware of the risk is:

A If the only reason why the defendant did not realize the risk is that he was too intoxicated he is guilty of recklessness.

B If the only reason why the defendant did not realize the risk is that he was too intoxicated he is not guilty of recklessness.

C If the only reason why the defendant did not realize the risk is that he was too intoxicated he is guilty only of criminal negligence

D If the only reason why the defendant did not realize the risk is that he was too intoxicated he is guilty only upon proof that he had actual knowledge of the consequences to him of excessive drinking

Question 9 : Modern state criminal code respecting voluntary intoxication as a defense

A C Are divided as to whether to allow such a defense in any case

B The authors of your criminal law hornbook take the position with respect to voluntary intoxication that

C In any case the law should ask what intent or knowledge is required as an element of the offense and whether given the extent of intoxication the defendant entertained such an intent or in fact knew what the crime required he know

Question 10 : If Dell asserts this intoxication defense, the jury should be instructed to find that

A. Dell is not liable for Flo's death, because alcohol destroys the ability to form the intent necessary for the crime.

B. Dell is not liable for Flo's death, because his intoxication was so great that he did not realize the nature and quality of his act.

C. Dell's intoxication will not totally relieve him of criminal liability, but it could be sufficient to negate his ability to premeditate or deliberate, thus reducing his criminal liability to second degree murder from first.

D. Dell's intoxication will have no mitigating effect, because he was voluntarily intoxicated. "

Question 11 : If Darryl is prosecuted for the murder of Payne, he should be:

A. acquitted, since plugging the machine back into the wall outlet or calling a doctor would not have saved Payne's life, but would only have prolonged it.

B. acquitted, since Darryl was under no legal duty to take affirmative action to save the life of Payne.

C. convicted, because as a nurse assigned to Payne's care, Darryl had an affirmative duty to save Payne from a life-threatening danger known to Darryl.

D. convicted, because Darryl desired or knew to a substantial certainty that his inaction would result in Payne's death. "

Question 12 : Of what crime is Devon guilty? 

A. Murder. B. Voluntary manslaughter.

C. Involuntary manslaughter.

D. Battery. "

Question 13 : If Marv is prosecuted for the murder of Victoria and evidence is presented that the bruises Marv observed were inflicted by Victoria's mother, Marv should be found 

A. guilty, because Marv failed to report the incident to the authorities as required by state law.

B. guilty, if Marv was not aware of the law requiring him to report evidence of child abuse to the authorities.

C. not guilty, Marv lacked the necessary mental state required to support a murder conviction.

D. not guilty, because Marv's failure to report the incident to the authorities was not the proximate cause of death.

Question 14 : If Don is charged with felony murder for the death of Bill, Don will be 

A. convicted, because by forcing Bill to wear the ""Security System"" overalls, Don demonstrated an intent to kill.

B. convicted, because Don's actions caused the death of another during the commission of a robbery.

C. acquitted, because Don neither intended to kill Bill nor was he responsible for the actions of the police.

D. acquitted, because the robbery was over once Don had obtained the money, changed into the clothing of the bank president and was making his escape. "

Question 15 : Dan is guilty of

A. No crime.

B. Manslaughter, because a suicide attempt made with bystanders nearby is generally considered reckless conduct sufficient for involuntary manslaughter.

C. Depraved heart murder, because his attempt to kill himself created a very high risk of serious injury or death to anyone who might attempt to prevent it.

D. Intent to kill murder, since his intent to kill himself is transferred to Vic. "

Question 16 : The jury should be instructed that Deft is 

A. guilty, no matter what he thought was in the package because there is strict liability for border crossing offenses.

B. guilty, if Deft knew that the package contained heroin and intended to transport it.

C. guilty, if Deft knew that the package contained illegal drugs, but not necessarily heroin.

D. guilty, because Deft should have known that the package contained some type of contraband. "

Question 17 : Rose should be found 

A. guilty, because this is a public welfare offense.

B. guilty, because she should have inquired whether the signs had been thrown away.

C. not guilty, but only if the jury finds she reasonably believed the signs were thrown away.

D. not guilty, if the jury finds she honestly believed the signs had been thrown away. "

Question 18 : If Dan is arrested and tried for murder and Dan asserts the defense of insanity, he is most likely to be found not guilty if the jurisdiction has adopted 

A. The M'Naghten rule.

B. The Model Penal Code.

C. The Felony Murder Rule.

D. The doctrine of self-defense.