Criminal Law & Evidence Flashcards

A defendant is convicted of possessing a controlled substance. The statute provides a mandatory minimum sentence that is doubled if the amount exceeds 100 grams. The drug quantity was not submitted to the jury. Under Apprendi v. New Jersey, is the enhanced sentence constitutional?

Answer: No, any fact increasing the penalty beyond the statutory maximum must be found by a jury

Apprendi held that any fact, other than a prior conviction, that increases the penalty beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to the jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

An officer smells marijuana coming from a parked car and sees a pipe in plain view on the passenger seat. The officer breaks the window to retrieve the pipe without a warrant. Which doctrine most directly justifies the seizure?

Answer: Plain view doctrine

The plain view doctrine allows an officer to seize evidence without a warrant when the officer is lawfully present, the item is in plain view, and its incriminating nature is immediately apparent.

Which standard governs the admissibility of expert scientific testimony under federal evidence rules after Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals?

Answer: Whether the testimony would assist the trier of fact and is based on sufficient reliable methodology

Daubert replaced the Frye standard and requires courts to act as gatekeepers, evaluating whether expert testimony is based on sufficient facts, reliable methodology, and is relevant to the case.

A defendant is charged with assault with intent to commit robbery. The defendant approaches a victim but abandons the plan when he sees a police cruiser. Under the MPC, has the defendant committed criminal attempt?

Answer: No, because voluntary abandonment is a complete defense under the MPC if timely and complete

The MPC recognizes voluntary abandonment as a defense to attempt if the defendant completely and voluntarily renounces criminal purpose before the attempt is completed.

A husband kills his wife after discovering her in bed with another man. He is charged with murder. Which doctrine, if applicable, would reduce the charge to manslaughter?

Answer: Heat of passion/adequate provocation

At common law, heat of passion with legally adequate provocation (such as discovering spousal infidelity in the act) reduces murder to voluntary manslaughter if the defendant had not cooled off.

A witness's prior inconsistent statement was made under oath at a prior proceeding. Under FRE 801(d)(1)(A), the statement is classified as:

Answer: Non-hearsay admissible as substantive evidence

FRE 801(d)(1)(A) classifies a prior inconsistent statement made under oath at a trial, hearing, or deposition as non-hearsay, making it admissible as substantive evidence, not merely for impeachment.

A police informant wears a wire and records a conversation with a defendant at the defendant's home. The defendant argues this violates the Fourth Amendment. What is the strongest counterargument for the prosecution?

Answer: The defendant assumed the risk that his companion might report the conversation

Under the assumption of risk doctrine from Hoffa v. United States, a defendant assumes the risk that a person he voluntarily speaks to may be a government agent or may relay the conversation to authorities.