AJ2 sample exam questions
(answers at bottom of page)

For First Unit Exam: Chapters 1 - 5

1. Evil Ed approached X who was standing a few feet away at the end of the bar. Evil Ed stated to X, " if you put my wife out of her misery, IÕll reward you handsomely. I mean it, I canÕt take her anymore. Snuff her, and name your price." X replied, "Are you serious?" Evil responded, " Does fifty thousand dollars sound like I am serious." X reported the incident to the police who arrested Evil Ed after an investigation revealed that Evil Ed and his wife were entangled in a bitter custody battle. Nothing ever happened to EdÕs wife.
a. Since words do not constitute acts, Evil Ed committed no crime
b. Words do not produce harm and cannot be the basis for prosecution
c. Words alone cannot amount to criminal conduct because there is no actus reus
d. None of the above

2. Corporations can in fact be convicted of criminal wrongdoing. Identify which of the underlying legal principles is used to prove mens rea when prosecuting a corporation for a crime which benefited it and was directed by one of its superior officers:
a. Alter Ego Doctrine
b. Indirect Liability Doctrine
c. Imputed Actus Reus Doctrine
d. None of the above

3. Criminal charges may be brought by:
a. An indictment
b. The filing of a criminal complaint
c. An arrangement
d. Both A & B
e. Neither A nor B

4. According to the Model Penal Code, if a person acts with a conscious objective to engage in the specified conduct or to cause a particular result, the person acts:
a. Recklessly
b. Purposely
c. Negligently
d. Knowingly

5. Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, parents are always legally responsible for the crimes of their children. T F

For Second Unit Exam: Chapters 6 - 8

1. Patron and Victim became engrossed in a heated argument while having drinks at a local bar. The situation escalated into a brawl and the combat was mutual. Patron was getting the best of Victim but would not stop hitting Victim in the face with his clenched fist. In all, Victim was struck over 25 times in the face. He died on the operating table in the emergency room.
a. The facts indicate implied malice
b. The facts indicate first degree murder
c. The facts indicate murder in the second degree
d. The facts indicate both A & C
e. None of the above

2. Victim was pregnant with child. The fetus was in its 8th month. The defendant, while driving his vehicle at 35 mph (the speed limit was 25 mph) failed to stop in time to avoid striking Victim who had just stepped into the crosswalk. The accident killed the victim and the fetus.
a. At common law this would have been a double homicide
b. Modernly the defendant could not be charged with two homicides
c. The facts indicate two counts of felony murder
d. None of the above

3. Defendant was a diagnosed paranoid but was not legally insane. While walking his dog one evening, he was confronted by Big John, a neighborhood bully. John told Defendant to hand over his money and told him he would get hurt. John was wearing a T-shirt, jogging shoes and jogging shorts. Immediately across the street was a playground which was very well lighted and occupied by several young men who were playing basketball. The confrontation occurred immediately in front of a crowded Laundromat. If Defendant pulled a gun and shot Big John, could he prove perfect self defense? Y N

4. In the above question (#3) if the trier of fact believed that Defendant was honestly afraid that there existed an imminent threat of serious injury or death, would a verdict of voluntary manslaughter be appropriate? Y N

5. Identify which of the underlying would constitute murder one:
a. A killing by poison where there existed no deliberation
b. A killing with express malice, premeditation and deliberation
c. A killing that was premeditated, purposeful and accomplished by means of torture
d. All of the above

6. Assume that Defendant, a paranoid schizophrenic, murdered his nephew and told the police that he believed that his nephew was a Communist spy who intended to launch a chemical attack in a large U.S. city. Also assume that the evidence showed that Defendant attempted to conceal the murder weapon (before the police arrived) and changed his bloody shirt. Can Defendant successfully prove that he was legally insane? Y N

7. Jacobson was prosecuted for a federal narcotics violation. He eventually sold narcotics to an undercover federal agent. One year prior to the sale in this case, Jacobson regularly sold drugs to various people.
a. Jacobson's previous sales would be irrelevant to the current prosecution because they occurred so long ago
b. In a federal prosecution, the predisposition of a defendant is not relevant
c. Jacobson's predisposition involving drugs would make it impossible for him to prove entrapment in this federal prosecution
d. None of the above

8. Defendant was attacked without cause while having a cocktail in a local bar. The attacker was much taller and much heavier than the defendant and not only verbally abused Defendant but proceeded to beat him about the face and body with clenched fists. When knocked down and behind a table, Defendant ran out of the restaurant and to his car. He drove away. He was intoxicated at the time.
a. Defendant would be excused from the criminal act of driving under the influence based on the defense of necessity
b. Defendant would be excused from the criminal act of driving under the influence based on the defense of duress
c. Defendant would be excused from the criminal act of driving under the influence based on the defense of consent
d. None of the above

9. The use of deadly force is legally permissible:
a. To protect property
b. If a person honestly believes he is faced with imminent death regardless of how reasonable the belief is
c. If used by a law enforcement officer to protect innocent citizens against an apparent imminent deadly attack
d. Both B & C

10. Defendant returned from a business trip to find that his wife had spent the previous weekend with his best friend. He learned that they had slept together.
Defendant and his wife had been married for 20 years and had 3 children. Upon getting the above information, Defendant got his gun from a bedroom dresser and shot his wife to death. Defendant was highly emotional at the time.
a. The crime would be murder in the first degree
b. The crime would be involuntary manslaughter
c. The crime would be felony-murder
d. The crime would be either murder two or voluntary manslaughter

11. The standard for legal insanity is the same as for medical insanity. In other words, one who is a paranoid schizophrenic and therefore medically insane would also be adjudged legally insane if prosecuted for criminal wrongdoing. T F

12. Would a person relying on self defense be able to prove this justification if the evidence proved that there existed only a reasonable appearance of imminent danger of death but not an actual danger? Y N

13. Identify which of the underlying is/are affirmative defenses in most states
a. Diminished capacity
b. Voluntary intoxication
c. Medical insanity
d. None of the above

14. Identify which of the underlying is not an affirmative defense in most states
a. Self defense
b. Defense of others
c. Necessity
d. All of the above are affirmative defenses

15. In a state prosecution wherein the defendant relies on the defense of entrapment an objective standard will be applied to determine whether the officer's conduct would have caused an ordinary law abiding citizen to break the law. T F

answers

1-d 2-d 3-n 4-y 5-d 6-n 7-c 8-a 9-c 10-d 11-f 12-y 13-d 14-d 15-t

top