Questions and Answers of Criminal Law

Do you agree with the court’s decision? Relying on the relevant facts in the case, defend your answer.
Why was Shelley not allowed the defense of consent in this case?
Should individuals be allowed to knowingly and voluntarily consent to the commission of crimes against themselves? Why or why not?
Why should they be allowed to consent to such conduct when in other situations (such as those enumerated in the Exploring Further cases that follow) they can’t consent?
According to the court, why can participants in a sporting event consent to conduct that would otherwise be a crime?
In your opinion, was Toops entitled to the necessity defense? Defend your answer with case and opinion details and the text section on the defense.
State the elements of the defense as the court identifies them. How do they compare with the elements stated in the text?
List all the facts and circumstances relevant to deciding whether Terry Toops was justified in driving while he was drunk.
In your opinion, did Peggy Stewart kill Mike Stewart in self-defense? As a preemptive strike?Or as retaliation? Defend your answer.
Consider the following comments:a. Retaliation, as opposed to defense, is a common problem in cases arising from wife battering and domestic violence. The injured wife waits for the first possibility
Summarize the court majority’s arguments against imminent danger. Summarize the dissent’s arguments for imminent danger.
List all the facts and circumstances relevant to deciding whether Peggy Stewart was in “imminent” danger.
Were Goetz’s shots a preemptive strike? Retaliation? Necessary for self-protection? Explain.
Would you add more? Remove some? Which ones? Why?
Do you agree with those circumstances?
Under what circumstances can people use deadly force, according to the New York statutes cited in the opinion?
Consider the following:a. New York tried Goetz for attempted murder and assault. The jury acquitted him of both charges. The jury said Goetz “was justified in shooting the four men with the
Summarize the court’s arguments for ruling against imminent danger.
State the court’s definition of “imminent” danger.
List the facts and circumstances relevant to deciding whether Charles Haynes was entitled to the defense of self-defense.
Does the court’s recommendation help you understand this concept of mistake? Does it help you to understand how it works in court proceedings? Explain your answers.
How does the court recommend the failure-ofproof mistake to juries?
List all the facts and circumstances relevant to deciding whether Ronald Sexton shot Alquadir Matthews by mistake.
According to the court, why were Maskovich’s actions not a superseding cause of his own death?
List all of the facts and circumstances relevant to deciding whether Armitage’s actions were the proximate cause of Peter Maskovich’s death.
List all of the facts and circumstances relevant to deciding whether Armitage’s actions were the“but for” cause of Peter Maskovich’s death.
Do you agree with the majority or the dissent?Defend your answer.
What arguments did the dissent give in response to the majority’s arguments?
Summarize the arguments that the majority of the court give to support this as a strict liability offense.
What mens rea, if any, do the words in the statute require?
What words, if any, in the statute indicate a mens rea requirement?
Is it possible to argue that Koppersmith knowingly or even purposely killed his wife? What facts, if any, support these two states of mind?
In your opinion, was Koppersmith reckless or negligent? Support your answer with relevant facts.
List all of the facts relevant to determining Koppersmith’s mental state with respect both to his acts and the results of his actions.
In your opinion, did Jantzi knowingly assault Rex Anderson? Back up your answer with the facts of the case and the trial and appellate court’s opinions.
State how, and explain why, Oregon modified the MPC definition of “knowingly.”
State the Oregon statute’s mental element for assault.
List all of the facts relevant to determining Pete Jantzi’s state of mind.
Did Smallwood intend to kill his victims, or to spread the virus? Does your answer depend at all on your position as to which interpretation of the law supports the most ethical public policy? Write
Write a paragraph for each opinion, summarizing their arguments regarding the facts required to prove the intent to kill by spreading HIV.
Then, go to http://mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/1996/122a95.pdf and read the Court of Appeals (Maryland’s supreme court) full opinion in the case.
Go to http://mdcourts.gov/opinions/cosa/1995/1678s94.pdf and read the full opinion of the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland (Maryland’s intermediate appeals court).
Is motive important in this case? Should it be?
Using the common law definition of “specific intent” and the Model Penal Code definitions of “purposely,” “knowingly,” “recklessly,” and“negligently” and relying on the relevant
Identify all of the facts relevant to determining Stark’s mental attitude regarding each of the elements in the assault statute.
Which is the better policy: making carjacking a general or specific intent crime? Defend your answer.
Do you agree that the legislature’s intent is clear that carjacking consists of the general intent to commit the act and not the intent to deprive Tipton of possession even for a brief period of
Summarize the court’s arguments that support its conclusion that Maryland’s carjacking statute is a general intent crime.
How does the court define “specific intent”?
How does the court define “general intent”?
Assume you’re the defense attorney. Argue that Miller didn’t physically or constructively possess the cocaine or marijuana.
Assume you’re the prosecutor. Argue that Miller actually and constructively possessed the cocaine and marijuana. Back up your arguments with facts in the case.
Match the facts of the case to the five factors you listed in (2).
List the five factors the court identifies that can prove possession in joint occupancy cases.
Identify the two elements of constructive possession discussed by the court.
Based on Lisa Factora-Borchers’ blog article, the grand jury presentment excerpt, and your text, write an essay arguing what, if any, ethical duty Michael McQueary had to act in behalf of the boy.
Read the excerpt from the grand jury presentment (pp.111–113) for details and criticisms of Coach McQueary’s actions and omissions during and following the alleged assault.
In your opinion, did the Pestinikases have a legal duty to Joseph Kly? Assuming they did have a legal duty, did they reasonably perform their duty?Back up your answer with facts and arguments in the
Summarize the arguments regarding criminal omission of both the majority and dissenting opinions.
List all of the failures to act and voluntary acts that are relevant to deciding whether the Pestinikases failed to perform a legal duty to Mr. Kly.
List all the facts relevant to deciding whether the Pestinikases had a legal duty to Joseph Kly.
In your opinion, should Decina be criminally liable for killing the girls? Back up your answer with specific details from the case excerpt and the excerpts from the Epilepsy Therapy
Which of his voluntary acts do the majority and dissent rely on to argue that he was, or was not, criminally liable for his involuntary acts during the seizure?
List Emil Decina’s voluntary acts before his seizure.
In your opinion, did Mrs. Cogdon’s conduct “include a voluntary act”? Defend your answer.
Summarize the court’s reasons for holding that Mrs. Cogdon didn’t murder Pattie.
How did the court define “voluntary act”?
State the facts relevant to deciding whether Mrs.Cogdon “voluntarily” killed her daughter Pattie.
In your opinion, which is the better rule for determining whether an act is voluntary: (a) the last act has to be voluntary or (b) that conduct has to include a voluntary act? Defend your answer.
Summarize the court’s reasons for holding that the trial judge wasn’t required to give the jury instruction that Burrell asked for.
State the court’s definition of “voluntary act.”
State the facts relevant to deciding whether Marc Burrell “voluntarily” shot Joey Baglione.
In your opinion, what is the “fair” punishment Gall deserves? Back up your answer with details from the facts and opinions of the Court.
Should the right to trial by jury apply to sentencing? Back up your answer with details from the facts and opinions of the Court.
Summarize the arguments of the concurring and dissenting opinions, applying the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury.
Summarize the arguments of the majority opinion, applying the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury.
Summarize the facts of the case.
If Justice Thomas is right that the Eighth Amendment contains no proportionality principle, what is cruel and unusual punishment?
In your opinion, was Ewing’s punishment proportional to the crime? Back up your answer with the facts of the case and the arguments in the opinions.
Define “proportionality” as the plurality opinion defines it. Summarize how the majority applies proportionality to Ewing’s sentence. How does Justice Scalia define “proportionality,” and
List Gary Ewing’s crimes, and match them to the three-strikes law.
The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has agreed to hear the case in 2012. In your opinion, how should SCOTUS rule? Defend your answer.
Summarize the dissent’s reason for arguing that“death in prison” for a juvenile is cruel and unusual punishment.
Summarize the majority’s four reasons for deciding that Omer Ninham’s sentence to life in prison without possibility of parole is not cruel and unusual punishment.
According to the Court, some crimes are worse than death. Do you agree? Is child rape one of them? Why? Why not?
In deciding whether the death penalty for child rape is cruel and unusual, is it relevant that Louisiana is the only state that punishes child rape with death?
Who should make the decision as to what is the appropriate penalty for crimes? Courts? Legislatures? Juries? Defend your answer.
According to the Court, why is death a disproportionate penalty for child rape? Do you agree?Explain your reasons.
To prepare the memorandum, read the following:a. U.S. v. Gementera (2004) (http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/379/596/475040/)b. “Shame on You: Enough with Humiliating
Assume you’re an advisor to the Criminal Law Committee in the California state legislature, which is considering legislation banning “shaming” punishments for selected crimes.You’re asked to
Whose opinion do you support? Defend your answe
Summarize Justice Thomas’s arguments in his dissent.
Summarize Justice Scalia’s arguments in his dissent.
Summarize Justice O’Connor’s arguments in her concurring opinion.
Summarize the majority opinion’s argument supporting its decision.
State exactly what the Court decided regarding homosexual sodomy.
Do you agree that it doesn’t go as far as allowing these plaintiffs to carry their handguns in the church? Defend your answer.
Do you agree with the District Court that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Heller and McDonald don’t provide much help in guiding the lower courts in deciding how far beyond the“right to
Summarize the Court’s reasons for concluding that the statute doesn’t violate plaintiffs’ right to bear arms.
Summarize the provisions in the Georgia statute that the plaintiffs contend violate their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Showing 200 - 300 of 1146