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
Pete owns a lost and found company where people who find lost property can deposit it and people who lose property can come and see if anybody has returned their belongings. Pete honestly but mistakenly believes that, if any property is not claimed after two months, it becomes the property of the finder. One day, Pete finds a silver necklace from Tiffany's lying on the ground near his shop. He takes it inside and holds onto it for two months. He then sells the necklace for a considerable amount of money. A few days later, the rightful owner comes into the store and asks Pete if he has her necklace. Pete tells her that he has sold it and she calls the police. Pete is charged with larceny, which is defined as intentionally taking someone else's property with the intention of permanently depriving them of it. If Pete claims mistake of law as a defense, he will succeed:
Correct A defendant can use a mistake of law defense to show that he did not have the requisite intent to commit a crime. In such an instance, if the prosecution cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did have the requisite intent, the defendant must be acquitted. Here, because of Pete's mistake of law, he thought that the necklace was his to do as he pleased. That being the case, he did not have the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the necklace. Therefore, he cannot be convicted of larceny and TRUE is the correct answer.
Incorrect! A defendant can use a mistake of law defense to show that he did not have the requisite intent to commit a crime. In such an instance, if the prosecution cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did have the requisite intent, the defendant must be acquitted. Here, because of Pete's mistake of law, he thought that the necklace was his to do as he pleased. That being the case, he did not have the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the necklace. Therefore, he cannot be convicted of larceny and TRUE is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 2
Pete owns a lost and found company where people who find lost property can deposit it and people who lose property can come and see if anybody has returned their belongings. One day, Pete finds a silver necklace from Tiffany's lying on the ground near his shop. Engraved into the back of the necklace is the name of the owner and a telephone number. Pete mistakenly believes that the law allows someone to do whatever he wants to with lost property even if he knows who the rightful owner is so he sells the necklace for a considerable amount of money. A few days later, the rightful owner comes into the store and asks Pete if he has her necklace. Pete tells her that he has sold it and she calls the police. Pete is charged with larceny, which is defined as intentionally taking someone else's property with the intention of permanently depriving them of it. If Pete claims mistake of law as a defense, he will succeed:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. Here, Pete did have the requisite intent to permanently deprive the owner of the necklace by selling it. However, because of a mistake of law, he thought that permanently depriving the owner of her necklace was legal. Because Pete's mistake only goes to his understanding of the law, he cannot raise a mistake of law defense to avoid a conviction. Therefore, FALSE is the correct answer.
Incorrect! If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. Here, Pete did have the requisite intent to permanently deprive the owner of the necklace by selling it. However, because of a mistake of law, he thought that permanently depriving the owner of her necklace was legal. Because Pete's mistake only goes to his understanding of the law, he cannot raise a mistake of law defense to avoid a conviction. Therefore, FALSE is the correct answer.
Question 3
Pete owns a lost and found company where people who find lost property can deposit it and people who lose property can come and see if anybody has returned their belongings. One day, Pete finds a silver necklace from Tiffany's lying on the ground near his shop. Engraved into the back of the necklace is the name of the owner and a telephone number. Pete looks up the state statute dealing with lost property and he sees that a finder of lost property can do whatever he wants to with lost property even if he knows who the rightful owner is. Pete sells the necklace for a considerable amount of money. A few days later, the rightful owner comes into the store and asks Pete if he has her necklace. Pete tells her that he has sold it and she calls the police. Pete is charged with larceny, which is defined as intentionally taking someone else's property with the intention of permanently depriving them of it. Right before Pete's trial begins, the statute that Pete had looked up is ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court so that Pete actually did commit larceny when he sold the necklace. If Pete claims mistake of law as a defense, he will succeed:
Correct If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. However, some jurisdictions do allow this defense in these situations as long as the mistake was reasonable and it was made based on one of three misunderstandings of the law. One possible misunderstanding of the law is where the defendant relied on a statute that was later found to be unconstitutional. In this situation, the defendant can use mistake of law as a successful defense. This is exactly what happened to Pete. Therefore, he can successfully use mistake of law as a defense and TRUE is the correct answer.
Incorrect! If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. However, some jurisdictions do allow this defense in these situations as long as the mistake was reasonable and it was made based on one of three misunderstandings of the law. One possible misunderstanding of the law is where the defendant relied on a statute that was later found to be unconstitutional. In this situation, the defendant can use mistake of law as a successful defense. This is exactly what happened to Pete. Therefore, he can successfully use mistake of law as a defense and TRUE is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 4
Pete owns a lost and found company where people who find lost property can deposit it and people who lose property can come and see if anybody has returned their belongings. One day, Pete finds a silver necklace from Tiffany's lying on the ground near his shop. Engraved into the back of the necklace is the name of the owner and a telephone number. Pete calls the state Attorney General to ask what he is legally allowed to do with the necklace. The Attorney General tells Pete that he is under no obligation to return the necklace and he can do whatever he wants with it. Pete sells the necklace for a considerable amount of money. A few days later, the rightful owner comes into the store and asks Pete if he has her necklace. Pete tells her that he has sold it and she calls the police. Pete is charged with larceny, which is defined as intentionally taking someone else's property with the intention of permanently depriving them of it. During Pete's trial, the Attorney General testifies that he unintentionally gave Pete the wrong information about this particular law. That being the case, Pete actually did commit larceny when he sold the necklace. If Pete claims mistake of law as a defense, he will succeed:
Correct If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. However, some jurisdictions do allow this defense in these situations as long as the mistake was reasonable and it was made based on one of three misunderstandings of the law. One possible misunderstanding of the law is where the defendant relies on an interpretation of the law given by either a person or an agency that is responsible for administering or enforcing the law. In this situation, the defendant can use mistake of law as a successful defense. This is exactly what happened to Pete. Therefore, he can successfully use mistake of law as a defense and TRUE is the correct answer.
Incorrect! If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. However, some jurisdictions do allow this defense in these situations as long as the mistake was reasonable and it was made based on one of three misunderstandings of the law. One possible misunderstanding of the law is where the defendant relies on an interpretation of the law given by either a person or an agency that is responsible for administering or enforcing the law. In this situation, the defendant can use mistake of law as a successful defense. This is exactly what happened to Pete. Therefore, he can successfully use mistake of law as a defense and TRUE is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 5
Pete owns a lost and found company where people who find lost property can deposit it and people who lose property can come and see if anybody has returned their belongings. One day, Pete finds a silver necklace from Tiffany's lying on the ground near his shop. Engraved into the back of the necklace is the name of the owner and a telephone number. Pete calls his uncle, a criminal attorney at a major firm, to ask what he is legally allowed to do with the necklace. Pete's uncle tells him that he is under no obligation to return the necklace and he can do whatever he wants with it. Pete sells the necklace for a considerable amount of money. A few days later, the rightful owner comes into the store and asks Pete if he has her necklace. Pete tells her that he has sold it and she calls the police. Pete is charged with larceny, which is defined as intentionally taking someone else's property with the intention of permanently depriving them of it. During Pete's trial, his uncle testifies that he unintentionally gave Pete the wrong information about this particular law. That being the case, Pete actually did commit larceny when he sold the necklace. If Pete claims mistake of law as a defense, he will succeed:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. However, some jurisdictions do allow this defense in these situations as long as the mistake was reasonable and it was made based on one of three misunderstandings of the law. One possible misunderstanding of the law is where the defendant relies on an interpretation of the law given by either a person or an agency that is responsible for administering or enforcing the law. However, all jurisdictions agree that good faith reliance on the advice of a private attorney is not enough for the mistake of law defense. That being the case, since Pete relied on the advice of a private attorney, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense and FALSE is the correct answer.
Incorrect! If a defendant had the requisite intent to commit an act but, because of a mistake of law, did not know that his act was illegal, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense. However, some jurisdictions do allow this defense in these situations as long as the mistake was reasonable and it was made based on one of three misunderstandings of the law. One possible misunderstanding of the law is where the defendant relies on an interpretation of the law given by either a person or an agency that is responsible for administering or enforcing the law. However, all jurisdictions agree that good faith reliance on the advice of a private attorney is not enough for the mistake of law defense. That being the case, since Pete relied on the advice of a private attorney, he will not be able to use mistake of law as a defense and FALSE is the correct answer.