Q&A Hero

Q: Even in situations where the defendant has a legal duty to act, his or her mere presence at the scene of a crime is not enough to amount to accomplice actus reus.

Q: Flight from the scene of a crime is enough evidence to convict a person of a crime or of being an accomplice.

Q: Mere presence at the scene of a crime isn"t enough to satisfy the accomplice actus reus requirement.

Q: Vicarious liability can apply either to enterprises or to individuals.

Q: Vicarious liability has to be created by statute.

Q: The Pinkerton rule states that the crime of conspiracy and the crime the conspirators actually commit as a result of their conspiracy are separate offenses. a. true b. false

Q: Vicarious liability transfers the criminal conduct of one party to another because of their relationship.

Q: Vicarious liability is based on relationships.

Q: Complicity establishes when you can be criminally liable for someone else's conduct.

Q: At common law, there were four parties to crime.

Q: Jorge gave Annette a ride in his car. They stopped at Jorge's mother's house to pick up some beer. They met Jorge's brother, Juan, at his mother's house and he joined them. Jorge said he wanted to have sex with Annette. Juan said he wanted to pick up his ex-girlfriend, Janette. Jorge drives the car to Janette's and she comes out of the house. Juan and Janette begin to argue and Juan stabs Janette with a knife, killing her. Jorge drives to a lake with Annette, Juan, and Janette's body where he helps Juan throw the body in the lake. Which of the following prior cases is most pertinent to Jorge's actions? a. State v. Chism b. State v. Walden c. State v. Ulvinen d. Backun v. United States

Q: Jorge gave Annette a ride in his car. They stopped at Jorge's mother's house to pick up some beer. They met Jorge's brother, Juan, at his mother's house and he joined them. Jorge said he wanted to have sex with Annette. Juan said he wanted to pick up his ex-girlfriend, Janette. Jorge drives the car to Janette's and she comes out of the house. Juan and Janette begin to argue and Juan stabs Janette with a knife, killing her. Jorge drives to a lake with Annette, Juan, and Janette's body where he helps Juan throw the body in the lake. What issue(s) would the court need to address in trying Jorge? a. was a felony committed before Jorge drove to the lake? b. did Jorge know of the commission of the felony by Juan? c. did Jorge help Juan to keep him from being arrested? d. the court would need to address all of these issues?

Q: Jorge gave Annette a ride in his car. They stopped at Jorge's mother's house to pick up some beer. They met Jorge's brother, Juan, at his mother's house and he joined them. Jorge said he wanted to have sex with Annette. Juan said he wanted to pick up his ex-girlfriend, Janette. Jorge drives the car to Janette's and she comes out of the house. Juan and Janette begin to argue and Juan stabs Janette with a knife, killing her. Jorge drives to a lake with Annette, Juan, and Janette's body where he helps Juan throw the body in the lake. What offense is Jorge likely to be charged with? a. accessory after-the-fact. b. complicity. c. accomplice. d. accomplice after-the-fact.

Q: George spent most of the afternoon playing cards with Chuck. A man carrying cash walked by and Chuck pulled a knife and robbed the man with the cash. Both George and Chuck fled the scene. George was caught; Chuck never was. What case deals with flight from the scene of a crime? a. Bailey v. U.S. b. State v. Walden c. State v. Ulvinen d. Backun v. United States

Q: George spent most of the afternoon playing cards with Chuck. A man carrying cash walked by and Chuck pulled a knife and robbed the man with the cash. Both George and Chuck fled the scene. George was caught; Chuck never was. This case is impacted by what rule? a. the Pinkerton rule b. the Peoni rule c. the Brady rule d. the mere presence rule

Q: George spent most of the afternoon playing cards with Chuck. A man carrying cash walked by and Chuck pulled a knife and robbed the man with the cash. Both George and Chuck fled the scene. George was caught; Chuck never was. George is unlikely to be charged with a crime because flight from the scene of a crime is not enough to prove a. accomplice actus reus. b. accomplice mens rea. c. accessory mens rea. d. accessory mens rea.

Q: A fraternity holds a party during rush week at a local college. A number of the guests are not of legal age to drink alcohol so the fraternity does not provide alcohol at the party. Several members of the fraternity go to the bank before the party and withdraw large quantities of one dollar bills to provide change for a vending machine that contains beer in a separate apartment at the back of the fraternity house. The fraternity is charged with recklessly selling alcohol to minors. Which of the following cases addresses this issue? a. State v. Zeta Chi Fraternity b. State v. Alpha Omega Fraternity c. State v. Beta Chi Fraternity d. none, there is no precedent for this case.

Q: A fraternity holds a party during rush week at a local college. A number of the guests are not of legal age to drink alcohol so the fraternity does not provide alcohol at the party. Several members of the fraternity go to the bank before the party and withdraw large quantities of one dollar bills to provide change for a vending machine that contains beer in a separate apartment at the back of the fraternity house. The fraternity is charged with recklessly selling alcohol to minors. What is the most likely outcome of the case? a. guilty. b. not guilty. c. unknown, there is no precedent for this case. d. guilty of a different crime.

Q: Tammy and Jenny are having coffee in Tammy's kitchen. Jenny uses an electrical cord to beat Tammy's one-year-old daughter for several hours repeatedly until she is bleeding. Tammy looks on but does nothing. Tammy is guilty of the crime because of what exception to the mere presence rule? a. the duty to act exception. b. the conspiracy to act exception. c. the intent to act exception. d. the diminished capacity to act exception.

Q: Tammy and Jenny are having coffee in Tammy's kitchen. Jenny uses an electrical cord to beat Tammy's one-year-old daughter for several hours repeatedly until she is bleeding. Tammy looks on but does nothing. Of the following crimes, which one is Tammy most likely to be found guilty of? a. accomplice to assault. b. complicity to assault. c. accomplice to battery. d. complicity to battery.

Q: Vicarious liability cases that attract the most attention involve a. individuals. b. state government. c. large national corporations. d. private charities.

Q: The legal fiction created by the Supreme Court which makes it possible for corporations to commit crimes is called a. respondeat superior b. actus reus c. mens rea d. magna cum laude

Q: Corporate criminal law began as, and still is, the creature of a. federal law. b. state law. c. civil law. d. blue-collar law.

Q: A farmer leases 200 acres of land to a renter he knows is going to use it to grow marijuana. This is an example of which of the following? a. accomplice actus reus b. accomplice mens rea c. accessory actus reus d. accomplice actus reus

Q: Which of the following is true about accomplice actus reus? a. actions taken after crimes are committed aren"t themselves accomplice actus reus, but juries can use participation after the crime to prove defendants participated before or during the commission of the crime. b. actions taken before crimes are committed aren"t themselves accomplice actus reus, but juries can use participation after the crime to prove defendants participated before or during the commission of the crime c. actions taken after crimes are committed aren"t themselves accomplice actus reus, juries cannot use participation after the crime to prove defendants participated before or during the commission of the crime d. actions taken before crimes are committed aren"t themselves accomplice actus reus, juries cannot use participation after the crime to prove defendants participated before or during the commission of the crime

Q: Words can qualify as accomplice actus reus, if they a. encourage the commission of the crime b. approve the commission of the crime c. encourage and approve the commission of the crime d. encourage, approve, and condone the commission of the crime

Q: Which of the following acts definitely qualify as accomplice actus reus? a. providing guns, supplies, or other instruments of crime. b. serving as a lookout. c. driving a getaway car. d. all of these acts definitely qualify as accomplice actus reus.

Q: The case of Pinkerton v. U.S. (1946) deals with what rule? a. the rule that the crime of conspiracy and the crime the conspirators agree to commit are separate offenses. b. the rule that even presence at the scene of a crime followed by flight isn"t enough action to establish accomplice actus reus. c. the common law rule that the government couldn"t try accomplices until principals in the first degree were convicted. d. the accessory liability rule that it is not as blameworthy to help someone else escape prosecution as it is to participate in the crime itself.

Q: What theory of accomplice liability assumes that when you choose to participate in crime, you forfeit your right to be treated as an individual? a. agency theory b. forfeited personal identity theory c. malicious teamwork theory d. benign offender theory

Q: What theory of accomplice liability assumes that we"re autonomous agents with the freedom to choose our actions? a. agency theory b. forfeited personal identity theory c. malicious teamwork theory d. benign offender theory

Q: Vicarious liability statutes grew out of public fear, frustration, and anger over juvenile violence and parents' a. inability to control their kids. b. failure to control their kids. c. desire to control their kids. d. intention to control their kids.

Q: Parent responsibility statutes are based on parents' acts and a. omissions. b. thoughts. c. intentions. d. expectations.

Q: Vicarious liability can apply either to enterprises or to a. government. b. bystanders. c. individuals. d. judges.

Q: Vicarious liability for another's crimes is a. created by statute. b. created by the courts. c. found in the common law. d. a form of accomplice liability.

Q: Criminal liability of corporations is a form of what kind of liability? a. co-conspirator b. vicarious c. accomplice d. accessory

Q: What transfers the actus reus and mens rea of an employee to the employer? a. vicarious liability b. strict liability c. accessory liability d. conspiracy liability

Q: Purposely acting and wanting a crime to succeed clearly qualifies as accomplice a. stare decisis. b. actus reus. c. voluntary act. d. mens rea.

Q: Accessory to a crime is a separate offense, usually a a. misdemeanor. b. felony. c. non-jailable offense. d. citation.

Q: Liability based on ownership or operation of a business may be specifically imposed by a. statute. b. contract. c. consideration. d. actus reus.

Q: Most vicarious liability involves which of the following relationships? a. Personal b. Romantic c. Business d. Family

Q: What are the two parties to crime that exist today? a. accomplices participants and accessories participants b. accomplices participants and annulments participants c. arrangements participants and accessories participants d. accomplices participants and arrangements participants

Q: Modern accessory-after-the-fact statutes typically have how many mens rea elements? a. two b. three c. four d. Five

Q: Under the common law, accessories-after-the-fact were a. punished less severely than the person who committed the crime. b. punished more severely than the person who committed the crime. c. punished in the same manner as the person who committed the crime. d. not punished because they were considered not guilty.

Q: What type of liability establishes when a party can be criminally liable because of a relationship? a. complicity b. vicarious c. Assumed d. Consent

Q: What type of liability establishes when you can be criminally liable for someone else's conduct? a. complicity b. vicarious c. assumed d. consent

Q: Court decisions have made the mens rea element of accomplice liability a. very clearan accomplice must desire the outcome of the crime they are knowingly aiding and abetting. b. very clearan accomplice must know they are aiding a crime, but they do not have to desire that the crime be committed. c. confusingsome courts have required only that the accomplice know they are facilitating a crime, and other courts require both knowledge and a desire for the crime to occur. d. irrelevant because there is no mens rea element.

Q: Which of the following cases involved Enron and an accounting firm that was convicted of obstructing the Securities and Exchange Commission? a. U.S. v. Arthur Andersen, LLP (2004) b. Railroad Company v. United States (1909) c. State v. Zeta Chi Fraternity 1997 d. Dunn v. Commonwealth (1997)

Q: What was the Court's rationale for extending vicarious liability by the doctrine of respondeat superior? a. "the tides of the times" b. "the trends of the times" c. "the changing of the times" d. "the history of the times"

Q: What dramatically changed the nature of corporations from government entities controlled by government to private business operated by internal management? a. white collar crime b. the dark ages c. the industrial revolution d. the dark figure of crime

Q: Vicarious liability transfers the actus reus and the mens rea of one person to another personor from one or more persons to an enterprisebecause of their a. state of mind. b. relationship. c. guilt. d. crime.

Q: Which of the following cases involves being an accessory-after-the-fact? a. Bailey v. U.S. b. Backun v. U.S. (1940) c. U.S. v. Peoni (1938) d. State v. Chism (1983)

Q: Mere presence of the defendant at the scene of a crime may create accomplice liability if a. the defendant secretly hopes the criminal will succeed. b. the defendant does not attempt to help the victim. c. the defendant knows the identity of the criminal but does not report the crime to the police. d. the defendant has a duty to prevent the crime and fails to prevent or attempt to prevent it.

Q: In general, merely being present at the scene of a crime a. is the actus reus of conspiracy. b. creates accomplice liability. c. creates a presumption that there was a conspiracy to commit the crime. d. is not sufficient to create accomplice liability.

Q: If they encourage and approve the commission of a crime, words can amount to a. accessory mens rea. b. complicity liability. c. solicitation. d. accomplice actus reus.

Q: According to what rule is even presence at the scene of a crime followed by flight not enough action to satisfy the actus reus requirement of accomplice liability? a. the mere presence rule b. the presence rule c. the knowing presence rule d. the acknowledgement rule

Q: What is the name of the rule that the conspiracy to commit the crime and the crime committed as a result of the conspiracy are different offenses? a. the Pinkerton rule b. the Peoni rule c. the Brady rule d. the Rakas rule

Q: An agreement to commit a crime is a a. solicitation. b. complicity crime. c. vicarious liability offense. d. conspiracy.

Q: Which of the following cases involves the mere presence rule? a. Bailey v. U.S. b. Backun v. U.S. (1940) c. U.S. v. Peoni (1938) d. State v. Chism (1983)

Q: Participants after crimes are committed are known as a. accomplices. b. accessories. c. conspirators. d. participants.

Q: Which liability has to be created by statute? a. accessory liability b. vicarious liability c. original liability d. no liability

Q: The common law rules that the established four different parties to a crime (principals-in-the-first and -second-degree and accessories-before and -after-the-fact) were probably a reaction to a. juvenile crime. b. the fact that most felonies were capital offenses. c. the Industrial Revolution. d. royal excesses.

Q: Participants after the commission of crimes are a. sometimes guilty of a separate, less serious offense. b. not guilty of anything. c. never guilty of a separate, more serious offense. d. always only guilty of a separate, equally serious offense.

Q: Participants before and during the commission of crimes are a. guilty of the crime itself. b. not guilty of the crime itself. c. less guilty of the crime itself. d. more guilty of the crime itself.

Q: Criminal liability is imposed on accomplices and accessories because they a. have a relationship that allows for the transfer of guilt. b. participated in the crimes. c. entered into a conspiracy to commit the crime. d. drove the getaway car.

Q: Participants who are involved after the commission of a crime are guilty of a a. more serious offense. b. less serious offense. c. separate offense. d. separate, less serious offense.

Q: The diminished capacity defense is available in most jurisdictions.

Q: The product-of-mental-illness test is also known as the right-wrong test of insanity.

Q: The defendant's predisposition to commit the crime is relevant in the objective test of entrapment.

Q: Most jurisdictions utilize the objective test of entrapment.

Q: In the majority of states, duress isn"t a defense to murder.

Q: Juvenile court judges can use their discretion to transfer a juvenile to adult criminal court.

Q: Diminished capacity and diminished responsibility are the same thing.

Q: Involuntary intoxication is a recognized defense in most, if not all, states.

Q: At common law, voluntary intoxication was not a defense.

Q: In all states and the federal courts, the defendant must prove insanity beyond a reasonable doubt.

Q: The right-wrong test focuses on defect in reason or cognition.

Q: Insanity is not the same as mental disease or defect.

Q: Many defendants plead the insanity defense.

Q: The defense of insanity excuses criminal liability when it seriously damages defendants' capacity to control their acts.

Q: Defendants who plead an excuse defense admit what they did was wrong.