| Question | Answer |
| 3 types of defenses*
Alibi
Justification
-Defendant accepts responsibility but claims what they did was right based on circumstances
Excuse
-Defendants admit what they did was wrong but claim they were not responsible | |
| Elements of self defense*
•Nonaggressor/Unprovoked attack
1.Exception – withdrawal
•Necessity
1.Imminence requirement
Proportionality
Reasonable Belief | |
| criminal conduct-
a criminal act triggered by criminal intent | |
| justification defenses
defendants admit they were responsible for their acts but claim that, under the circumstances, what they did was right | |
| excuse defenses
defendants admit what they did was wrong but claim that, under the circumstances, they weren’t responsible for what they did | |
| affirmative defenses
defendants have to “start matters off by putting in some evidence in support” of their justification or excuse defenses | |
| perfect defenses
defenses in which defendants are acquitted if they’re successful | |
| competency hearings
special hearings to determine if defendants who have used the insanity excuse defense are still insane | |
| imperfect defense
when a defendant fails in the full defense but is found guilty of a
lesser offense | |
| mitigating circumstances
circumstances that convince fact finders (judges or juries) that defendants don’t deserve the maximum penalty for the crime they’re convicted of | |
| initial aggressor
someone who provokes an attack can’t then use force to defend
herself against the attack she provoked | |
| withdrawal exception
if initial aggressors completely withdraw from attacks they
provoke, they can defend themselves against an attack by their initial victims | |
| A legal fiction turns what into an act, although it is really a passive state?
Possession | |
| Drivers with dangerously high blood pressure who suffer strokes while they’re driving and kill someone while the stroke has incapacitated them is an example of which of the following?
voluntarily induced involuntary acts | |
| Most offenses that don’t require a mens rea do include which of the following
an attendant circumstances element | |
| The concurrence element means that a criminal intent has to
trigger the criminal act | |
| Criminal liability without subjective or objective fault is also called
Strict liability | |
| Another term for criminal act is
Actus reus | |
| General intent is the intent to
have the mens rea. | |
| Proximate cause is a subjective question of fairness that appeals to the jury’s sense
Justice | |
| What are the names of the two kinds of cause required to prove causation in “bad result” crimes?
factual cause and legal cause | |
| What is the only crime defined in the U.S. Constitution?
treason | |
| According to Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which of the following describes the constitutional right to privacy?
a fundamental right | |
| Which of the following rights is guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment?
Correct!
flag burning as a political protest | |
| Which amendments to the Constitution resulted in the void-for-vagueness doctrine
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments | |
| What name is given to offensive, sexually explicit material that is not protected by the First Amendment?
obscenity | |
| If an appellate court affirms the decision of the court immediately below, this means that the lower court’s decision is
overturned | |
| Retributionists assume that
justice is best served by sending convicted offenders to prison | |
| Sentencing laws that make prison release dependent on rehabilitation are called
indeterminate sentencing laws. | |
| The assumption underlying rehabilitation theory is that
forces beyond offenders’ control cause them to commit crimes and experts using the correct therapy can reform criminals | |
| The theory of punishment that includes the idea that it is right to hate criminals and they deserve to be punished proportionate to the harm they have done is the theory of
retribution | |
| Which doctrine imposes a legal duty to help or call for help for imperiled strangers?
the “Good Samaritan” doctrine | |
| Proximate cause is a subjective question of fairness that appeals to the jury’s sense of
justice | |
