US â Criminal Law â Quiz 1
US criminal law & procedure â actus reus, mens rea, defenses, and the constitutional rights of the accused.
- 1.
A defendant is charged with murder after shooting a man who he genuinely but unreasonably believed was about to attack him. The jurisdiction follows the Model Penal Code. Which of the following best describes the defendant's criminal liability for homicide?
- 2.
Under the Model Penal Code, Adam leaves his infant daughter unattended in a hot car for four hours, resulting in her death. Adam claims he simply forgot she was in the car. Which MPC mental state, if proven, would support a conviction for negligent homicide?
- 3.
Priya and Omar agree to rob a bank. Priya backs out the day before and tells Omar she no longer wants to participate. Omar commits the robbery alone. Priya is charged with conspiracy to commit bank robbery. Under the common law majority rule, which of the following is most accurate?
- 4.
During a robbery, Victor shoots a store clerk intending only to wound her so she cannot call police. The clerk dies. Victor is charged with first-degree murder under a statute requiring 'willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing.' Which argument best supports acquittal of first-degree murder?
- 5.
Keisha is charged with attempted arson after she poured gasoline around the exterior of a building but had not yet lit a match when police arrested her. Under the Model Penal Code's test for attempt, is Keisha guilty?
- 6.
Hector robs a convenience store at gunpoint. During the robbery, the cashier has a heart attack and dies of fright. No physical violence was used. Hector is charged with felony murder. Which of the following is the strongest argument against felony murder liability?
- 7.
Teresa is arrested and brought to the police station. Before the officers begin questioning, they do not inform her of her Miranda rights. Teresa spontaneously says, 'I know why I'm hereâI shot him.' May the prosecution use this statement at trial?
- 8.
Under the M'Naghten test for insanity, a defendant who, due to mental disease, knew exactly what he was doing (i.e., that he was stabbing a person) but believed God commanded him to do it and that it was therefore morally justified, would most likely:
- 9.
Luis drives his car recklessly at 90 mph through a school zone, killing a child. He is charged under a statute making it a crime to 'knowingly operate a vehicle in a manner likely to cause serious bodily harm or death.' Under the MPC definition of 'knowingly,' which of the following best describes whether Luis satisfies the mens rea element?
- 10.
During a bank robbery, gang member Felix threatens teller Rosa with death if she does not open the vault. Rosa, fearing for her life, complies and hands over the money. Rosa is later charged as an accomplice to the robbery. Rosa raises the defense of duress. Which of the following best describes the availability of the duress defense for Rosa?
Questions & answers
1. A defendant is charged with murder after shooting a man who he genuinely but unreasonably believed was about to attack him. The jurisdiction follows the Model Penal Code. Which of the following best describes the defendant's criminal liability for homicide?
Answer: The defendant may be convicted of no greater than negligent homicide because the MPC treats an unreasonable but honest belief in the need for self-defense as negating purpose and knowledge but leaving open liability for a lesser mental state.
Under MPC § 3.04 and § 3.09, when a defendant claims self-defense but his belief in the necessity was reckless or negligent, the defense is not a complete bar; instead, he retains whatever liability corresponds to that culpable mental state (e.g., recklessness = manslaughter, negligence = negligent homicide). Because the facts specify an unreasonable (but not reckless) belief, the lowest applicable culpability is negligence, making negligent homicide the ceiling. Option A is wrong because an unreasonable belief does not fully exculpate under the MPC. Options B and D misstate MPC § 3.09, which does not treat the mistake as simply voiding the defense and reinstating murder. Option C confuses the extreme emotional disturbance doctrine (MPC § 210.3) with imperfect self-defense.
2. Under the Model Penal Code, Adam leaves his infant daughter unattended in a hot car for four hours, resulting in her death. Adam claims he simply forgot she was in the car. Which MPC mental state, if proven, would support a conviction for negligent homicide?
Answer: Adam should have been aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk, and his failure to perceive it was a gross deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe.
Under MPC § 2.02(2)(d), a person acts negligently when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and his failure to perceive it is a gross deviation from reasonable care. This is the mental state required for negligent homicide under MPC § 210.4. Option A describes recklessness (conscious disregard), not negligence. Options B and E describe knowledge or purpose. Option D describes purpose (conscious object to cause death), which would support a murder charge, not merely negligent homicide.