Multistate Bar Exam Criminal Law 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A defendant is charged with rape under a statute requiring 'forcible compulsion.' The victim physically resisted but the defendant overpowered her. Which element of rape does this scenario clearly satisfy?
- Lack of consent only
- Forcible compulsion only
- Both lack of consent and forcible compulsion (Correct answer)
- Neither, because resistance alone is insufficient
Correct answer: Both lack of consent and forcible compulsion
Physical resistance by the victim establishes both lack of consent and, when the defendant overpowers her, forcible compulsion.
Question 2: A defendant enters a store, places merchandise in his coat, and walks to the exit. Before he leaves, store security stops him. Is he guilty of larceny?
- No, because he never left the store
- Yes, because asportation was complete when he moved the items (Correct answer)
- No, because he was caught before completing the taking
- Yes, only if he intended to leave without paying
Correct answer: Yes, because asportation was complete when he moved the items
Asportation (carrying away) is satisfied by any movement of the property, however slight, with the required intent — leaving the store is not required.
Question 3: A defendant receives stolen goods knowing they are stolen. He is charged with receiving stolen property. Later, the goods are proven to not have been stolen. Can the defendant be convicted?
- Yes, because he believed the goods were stolen
- No, because receiving stolen property requires the goods to actually be stolen (Correct answer)
- Yes, because mens rea alone is sufficient for this crime
- No, because mistake of fact is a complete defense here
Correct answer: No, because receiving stolen property requires the goods to actually be stolen
Receiving stolen property requires the goods to actually be stolen; if they were not, the actus reus is absent and conviction is not possible.
Question 4: A defendant is convicted of arson for burning down a vacant building he owns. Under the common law, is he guilty of arson?
- Yes, because he intentionally set fire to a building
- No, because common law arson requires the dwelling of another (Correct answer)
- Yes, because arson covers all intentional fires
- No, because the building was vacant
Correct answer: No, because common law arson requires the dwelling of another
Common law arson requires the malicious burning of the dwelling of another; a person cannot commit common law arson by burning his own property.
Question 5: A defendant is charged with embezzlement after converting funds entrusted to him as treasurer of a club. Which element distinguishes embezzlement from larceny?
- Intent to permanently deprive
- Lawful initial possession converted fraudulently (Correct answer)
- Taking by trespass
- Asportation of property
Correct answer: Lawful initial possession converted fraudulently
Embezzlement involves fraudulent conversion of property already lawfully in the defendant's possession, unlike larceny which requires a trespassory taking.
Question 6: A defendant threatens to expose embarrassing (but legal) information about a victim unless paid $5,000, and the victim pays. The defendant is charged with extortion. Is the threat to reveal legal information sufficient for extortion?
- No, because the information is not criminal
- Yes, because extortion covers threats to expose any information to obtain property (Correct answer)
- No, because the information was true
- Yes, only if the victim suffered actual harm
Correct answer: Yes, because extortion covers threats to expose any information to obtain property
Extortion (blackmail) covers threats to expose any information — criminal or embarrassing but legal — made to obtain money or property from the victim.
Question 7: A defendant kills his terminally ill spouse at her repeated request to end her suffering. Which crime is he most likely guilty of under common law?
- No crime, because consent negates criminal liability for homicide
- Voluntary manslaughter
- Murder (Correct answer)
- Involuntary manslaughter
Correct answer: Murder
At common law, consent is not a defense to homicide; an intentional killing is murder regardless of the victim's request.
Multistate Bar Exam Criminal Law 4
A defendant is charged with rape under a statute requiring 'forcible compulsion.' The victim physically resisted but the defendant overpowered her.
Which element of rape does this scenario clearly satisfy?