Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
criminal law test
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| perfect defense = | acquittal |
| imperfect defense = | lesser charges |
| we must prove defense by? | proponderance of evidence |
| excuse defenses | admit they are wrong but not responsible for what they did. |
| failure of proof defenses | defendant only has to raise a reasonable doubt about the prosecutions proof in just one element. |
| 4 things in order to prove self defense | 1.unprovoked attack-defender didn't attack first 2. necessity-deadly force used if reasonable belief 3.proportionality-excessive force is not allowed 4.Reasonable belief-must reasonably believe that it's necesary to use deadly force repel imm attck |
| Retreat | you have to retreat from an attack that if you reasonably believe you are in serious danger or death. and that backing off won't unreasonably put you in danger of death or bodily harm. |
| State v. Goetz | Goetz shot at four boys after they asked him for five dollars. Unnesscesary use of deadly force. |
| Stand your ground rule | you can stand your ground and kill to defend yourself without retreating from any place you have a right to be. |
| Castle exception | when you are attacked in your house you have a right to stand your ground. |
| Curtilage | area immediately surrounding the home. |
| Deadly force is not used for | loss of property |
| Minority view about stand your ground rule is? | get out and be safe |
| Choice of evils is also known as? | general defense of necessity, justifies a lesser crime to avoid the harm of a greater crime. |
| Model penal code choice of evils provision | 1. identify evils 2. ranks evils. 3. choose based on reasonable belief that the greater evil is imminent. |
| the right choices are? (3 things) | life, safety, and health over property. |
| 4 situations where consent justifies otherwise criminal conduct | 1. No serious injury results from consent 2. Injury happens during sporting event 3. Conduct benefits consenting person ex: surgery 4. The consent is to sexual conduct |
| voluntary consent | consent was product of free will and not force |
| knowing consent | person knows what he/she is consenting too, person is old enough and not insane. |
| authorized consent | the person consenting has authorized authority to give the consent. |
| State v. Shelley | guy got punched in face during pickup basketball game. Was not within the rules of the game so he was convicted of second degree assault |
| Insanity defense aka? | affirmative defense of insanity- legally excuses a person from criminal liability because of a mental disease or defect. -- must prove by a proponderance of evidence |
| Civil commitment | a non-criminal proceeding in which courts have the power to decide if defendants who were insane when they committed their crime are still insane. |
| Four tests for insanity | the right wrong test irresistable impulse test durham rule substantial capacity test (model penal code) |
| Right wrong test (2 things) | Mcnaughton rule- defendant suffered a defect of reason caused by a disease of the mind. and consequently at time of crime person did not know the nature or quality of act and didn't know the act was wrong. |
| Irresistible impulse test aka? | policeman at elbow older test mental disease sole cause of act. know act is wrong but can't bring into their knowledge of right and wrong |
| The product of mental illness aka? | durham rule -used by maine, acts are products of mental disease of defect and excuse criminal liability |
| Substantial capacity test aka? | model penal code -different language -appreciate vs. know -conform vs. total lack of control |
| diminished capacity | not affirmative or perfect offense -not guilty of particular crime but may be guilty of a lesser one |
| diminished responsibility | what I have done was wrong but under certain circumstances I'm less responsible |
| excuse of age | under 7 no criminal liability 7-14 no criminal capacity but presumption could be overcome. Over 14- same capacity as adults. |
| Defense of duress | excuse that defendant says they were forced to do what they did. |
| 4 elements in defense of duress | nature of threat immediacy crimes the defense applies to (never murder) level of belief regarding the threat |
| involuntary intoxication | excuse of criminal liability in all states where defendants don't know they are taking intoxicants or know but are forced to take them. |
| entrapment | excuse that argues government agents got people to commit a crime they otherwise would not commit |
| Can prove disposition to commit the crime in the following ways | prior convictions for similar offenses willingness to commit similar offenses display of criminal expertise in carrying out the offense readiness to commit the crime. |
| State vs. Odell | killed his father at an Easter dinner. Had a mental defect but under Mcnaughton he knew he was going to kill his dad. |
| State vs. K.R.I | 8 years and 2 months old, cutoff for liability was 8 years appealed and reversed. |
Created by:
jsessler001