Purchase a course multi-pack for yourself or a friend and save up to 50%!
5-COURSE MULTI-PACK $180
10-COURSE MULTI-PACK $300
Accelerated 1-year bachelor's program
Question 1
After years of wearing glasses, Mitch decides to have laser vision correction done on his eyes. The procedure goes well but, unfortunately, he is groggy enough afterwards that, when he goes home, he does not realize that he has mistakenly walked up to his neighbor Abby's door instead of his own. Not being able to see very well, Mitch cannot figure out why his keys do not work in the lock but, being too groggy to think about it, he breaks a window next to the front door and begins to climb through. Abby, who is home in bed, hears the window break and calls the police. The police arrive within minutes and arrest Mitch. Mitch is charged with attempted burglary. He will probably be:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct The mens rea aspect of attempt has two elements to it, both of which must be satisfied in order for the defendant to be convicted. The first is the intent to commit an act that is necessary for the commission of the crime or that will result in the commission of the crime. The second is the intent necessary for the crime itself. In this case, Mitch did not have the intent to commit a crime in Abby's house which is necessary for a charge of burglary. That being the case, Mitch does not satisfy the second prong of the mens rea requirement for attempt and, therefore, he cannot be convicted. Thus, D is the correct answer.
Incorrect! The mens rea aspect of attempt has two elements to it, both of which must be satisfied in order for the defendant to be convicted. The first is the intent to commit an act that is necessary for the commission of the crime or that will result in the commission of the crime. The second is the intent necessary for the crime itself. In this case, Mitch did not have the intent to commit a crime in Abby's house which is necessary for a charge of burglary. That being the case, Mitch does not satisfy the second prong of the mens rea requirement for attempt and, therefore, he cannot be convicted. Thus, D is the correct answer.
Question 2
Sam and Josh are standing on a pedestrian bridge trying to throw rocks into a river. In order to reach the river, they must throw their rocks about fifty feet and across a well traveled street. Leo is walking down the street on his way to work. Unfortunately, one of Josh's throws hits Leo in the head and he spends 3 months in a coma. Josh is charged with assault with a deadly weapon and attempted criminally negligent homicide. Josh can be convicted of:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Most jurisdictions hold that there is no such thing as attempt to commit crimes whose mens rea is recklessness for the simple reason that, by definition, you cannot attempt to be reckless. Therefore, while Josh can be convicted of the assault, he cannot be convicted for attempted criminally negligent homicide. Therefore, B is the correct answer.
Incorrect! Most jurisdictions hold that there is no such thing as attempt to commit crimes whose mens rea is recklessness for the simple reason that, by definition, you cannot attempt to be reckless. Therefore, while Josh can be convicted of the assault, he cannot be convicted for attempted criminally negligent homicide. Therefore, B is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 3
Sam and Josh are looking to make some quick money to buy some marijuana. They know that Leo walks to work every day and they work out a plan to hide behind some bushes and jump out and attack Leo when he walks by. They do hide in some bushes along the route that Leo takes but, on this particular day, Leo calls in sick and doesn't walk by Sam and Josh. A cop sees Sam and Josh hiding and arrests them for loitering. When they confess to their plans, they are charged with attempted robbery. They will probably be:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct In order to be convicted of attempt, the defendant must commit an act that represents a step toward the committing of the crime but that is beyond simple preparation. The Model Penal Code lists a number of acts that qualify as a substantial step, one of which is lying in wait for the victim. This is exactly what Josh and Sam did. Therefore, they can be convicted of attempted robbery and B is the correct answer.
Incorrect! In order to be convicted of attempt, the defendant must commit an act that represents a step toward the committing of the crime but that is beyond simple preparation. The Model Penal Code lists a number of acts that qualify as a substantial step, one of which is lying in wait for the victim. This is exactly what Josh and Sam did. Therefore, they can be convicted of attempted robbery and B is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 4
Sam and Josh are looking to make some quick money to buy some marijuana. They work out a plan to hide behind some bushes on a busy street and jump out and attack a pedestrian who looks like he has money. They do hide in some bushes but, before they can rob someone, a cop sees them hiding and arrests them for loitering. When they confess to their plans, they are charged with attempted robbery. They will probably be:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct In order to be convicted of attempt, the defendant must commit an act that represents a step toward the committing of the crime but that is beyond simple preparation. The Model Penal Code lists a number of acts that qualify as a substantial step, one of which is selecting the victim. However, if a defendant considers a number of different victims and never settles on one, he cannot be convicted of attempt because his efforts in selecting a victim do not constitute the necessary act. That being the case, Sam and josh cannot be convicted here because they did not perform the necessary act to warrant an attempt conviction. Therefore, D is the correct answer.
Incorrect! In order to be convicted of attempt, the defendant must commit an act that represents a step toward the committing of the crime but that is beyond simple preparation. The Model Penal Code lists a number of acts that qualify as a substantial step, one of which is selecting the victim. However, if a defendant considers a number of different victims and never settles on one, he cannot be convicted of attempt because his efforts in selecting a victim do not constitute the necessary act. That being the case, Sam and josh cannot be convicted here because they did not perform the necessary act to warrant an attempt conviction. Therefore, D is the correct answer.
Question 5
Danny, Scott, Zach, Ronnie and Steven conspire to steal one hundred bars of solid gold belonging to the United States Treasury from a branch of the Fleet Bank of Boston. What they do not know is that all of the U.S. Treasury's gold is kept at Fort Knox and therefore, there is no gold in the Fleet Bank of Boston's vault. They are caught before they can actually rob the bank and are charged with conspiracy to commit Federal Grand Larceny. The defendants argue that they should not be convicted of the conspiracy because, since there was no gold at the bank, it was impossible to commit the crime they were trying to commit. This impossibility argument is a valid defense and they will be acquitted:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct One possible defense to attempt charges is impossibility. The general rule is that if the impossibility is a legal impossibility the defendant can mount an impossibility defense. However, if the impossibility is only a factual impossibility he cannot mount the defense. Legal impossibility is basically where the defendant sets out to commit an act that he thinks is criminal but is really, in fact, legal. Factual impossibility is where the defendant sets out to commit an act that, if successful, would constitute a crime but, because of certain factors that the defendant does not know about, it is impossible for him to actually commit the crime. Here, it was factually impossible to commit the crime. Had the robbery been successful it would have constituted a crime but, because there was no gold at the bank, it was impossible to commit the crime they were trying to commit. Because this was only factual impossibility, they cannot use impossibility as a defense. Therefore, they will be convicted and FALSE is the correct answer.
Incorrect! One possible defense to attempt charges is impossibility. The general rule is that if the impossibility is a legal impossibility the defendant can mount an impossibility defense. However, if the impossibility is only a factual impossibility he cannot mount the defense. Legal impossibility is basically where the defendant sets out to commit an act that he thinks is criminal but is really, in fact, legal. Factual impossibility is where the defendant sets out to commit an act that, if successful, would constitute a crime but, because of certain factors that the defendant does not know about, it is impossible for him to actually commit the crime. Here, it was factually impossible to commit the crime. Had the robbery been successful it would have constituted a crime but, because there was no gold at the bank, it was impossible to commit the crime they were trying to commit. Because this was only factual impossibility, they cannot use impossibility as a defense. Therefore, they will be convicted and FALSE is the correct answer.
Question 6
Danny, Scott, Zach, Ronnie and Steven conspire to steal one hundred bars of solid gold belonging to the United States Treasury from a branch of the Fleet Bank of Boston. The night before the robbery, Danny decided to back out of the plan. He tells the others that he thinks security at the bank has been increased and that it is not impossible to successfully carry out the robbery. The others proceed without Danny and are caught before they can actually rob the bank. Everybody, including Danny, is charged with attempted robbery. Danny argues that he withdrew from the crime and therefore, he should be acquitted. This argument is a valid defense and Danny will be acquitted:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct The Model Penal Code and the statutes that are based on it allow withdrawal to be used as a defense so long as two conditions are met. First, the abandonment must be entirely voluntary. This means that the withdrawal cannot be based on any circumstances regarding the difficulty of actually committing the crime or the chances of being caught that that defendant was unaware of when he began his attempt. Second, the withdrawal must be complete. In this case, Danny's withdrawal was not entirely voluntary. He withdrew because of changed circumstances that made the crime, in his mind, harder to commit. Therefore, his withdrawal is not legally effective and FALSE is the correct answer.
Incorrect! The Model Penal Code and the statutes that are based on it allow withdrawal to be used as a defense so long as two conditions are met. First, the abandonment must be entirely voluntary. This means that the withdrawal cannot be based on any circumstances regarding the difficulty of actually committing the crime or the chances of being caught that that defendant was unaware of when he began his attempt. Second, the withdrawal must be complete. In this case, Danny's withdrawal was not entirely voluntary. He withdrew because of changed circumstances that made the crime, in his mind, harder to commit. Therefore, his withdrawal is not legally effective and FALSE is the correct answer.