Reference no: EM133901389
Questions
1. For which of the following statutes would a court consider whether to apply strict liability?
a) "Anyone who intentionally harms another person is guilty of a felony."
b) "It is a misdemeanor to vandalize the property of any person or business."
c) "Reckless endangerment of a child in one's car is punishable by up to a year in prison."
d) "It is unlawful to deliberately lie to a law enforcement officer during an investigation."
2. At common law, if rape is defined as "sex by force or threat of force without a woman's consent," what should the court require the prosecution to prove regarding the defendant's knowledge of the victim's lack of consent?
a) The defendant actually knew that the victim did not consent.
b) The defendant consciously disregarded a risk that the victim did not consent.
c) The defendant unreasonably failed to realize that the victim did not consent.
d) The prosecution need not prove anything regarding knowledge of lack of consent.
3. If rape is defined as "sex by force or threat of force without a woman's consent," and a court were applying Model Penal Code principles, what should the court require the prosecution to prove regarding the defendant's knowledge of the victim's lack of consent?
a) The defendant actually knew that the victim did not consent.
b) The defendant consciously disregarded a risk that the victim did not consent.
c) The defendant unreasonably failed to realize that the victim did not consent.
d) The prosecution need not prove anything regarding knowledge of lack of consent.
4. If rape is defined as "sex by force or threat of force without a woman's consent," in which of the following circumstances would the court consider whether to apply strict liability?
a) If the court was applying the criminal definition as developed at common law.
b) If the court was interpreting the criminal definition using Model Penal Code principles.
c) If the court was interpreting the criminal definition as created by statute.
d) None of the above.
5. When a state court interprets a criminal statute, it is trying to determine the intent of which of the following?
a) The state supreme court.
b) The governor.
c) Victims' rights groups.
d) The state legislature.
6. When a court is trying to determine legislative intent, which of the following, if available, would you not expect the court to consider?
a) Statements made by a legislator on social media.
b) Earlier drafts of the statute.
c) Statements made by legislators during legislative debates regarding the statute.
d) How the legislature defined terms used in the subject statute in other, earlier statutes.
7. If rape is defined by statute as "sex by force or threat of force without a woman's consent," which of the following is not a factor the court would take into consideration in determining whether to apply strict liability or instead require some showing of culpability?
a) The public reaction if the court interprets the law so as to make it harder to secure a conviction.
b) The difficulty of proving mens rea.
c) The actor's ability to realize they may be engaging in dangerous or wrongful conduct.
d) The severity of punishment.
8. A court is trying to determine whether to apply a strict liability standard to a statute that provides: "Disposing of old batteries in ordinary trash receptacles is punishable as a misdemeanor." Which of the following would not be relevant to its analysis of how to interpret the statute's silence on mens rea?
a) The placement of old batteries in ordinary landfills may leach toxic chemicals into the city water supply.
b) The rate at which old batteries have been appearing in ordinary landfills has increased 47% over the last two years.
c) The mayor is running for reelection and has made the environment a focus of her campaign.
d) The fact that the conduct is punished as a misdemeanor.