Multistate Bar Exam Criminal Law 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A defendant, acting as an accessory before the fact, helps plan a robbery but is not present when it occurs. Under modern law, what is his liability?
- He cannot be convicted because he was absent
- He is liable as a principal to the same extent as those who committed the robbery (Correct answer)
- He is only liable for conspiracy, not robbery
- He is liable only if the robbery was completed
Correct answer: He is liable as a principal to the same extent as those who committed the robbery
Modern law abolishes the distinction between principals and accessories before the fact; all who aid, abet, or counsel are liable as principals.
Question 2: A defendant honestly and reasonably believed he was about to be attacked and killed a person who turned out to be an innocent bystander. Under the MPC, is imperfect self-defense available?
- No, because the victim was innocent
- Yes, the defendant may be convicted of a lesser offense due to the honest but unreasonable belief
- Yes, the honest belief is a complete defense under the MPC (Correct answer)
- No, because self-defense requires the threat to be real
Correct answer: Yes, the honest belief is a complete defense under the MPC
Under the MPC, an honest but mistaken belief in the need for self-defense is a complete defense if the belief was reasonable; if unreasonable, it may reduce but not eliminate liability.
Question 3: A defendant is prosecuted for murder under the year-and-a-day rule after the victim dies 14 months after being stabbed. Under the common law, can the defendant be convicted of murder?
- Yes, because the defendant caused the victim's death
- No, because death occurred more than one year and one day after the act (Correct answer)
- Yes, because the stabbing was the proximate cause of death
- No, because the statute of limitations expired
Correct answer: No, because death occurred more than one year and one day after the act
At common law, a defendant could not be convicted of homicide if the victim died more than one year and one day after the defendant's act.
Question 4: A defendant is entrapped by a government agent who repeatedly persuades a previously law-abiding person to sell drugs. Which entrapment test focuses on the defendant's predisposition?
- The objective test (MPC)
- The subjective test (majority federal rule) (Correct answer)
- The reasonable person test
- The but-for causation test
Correct answer: The subjective test (majority federal rule)
The subjective test, used by most federal courts, focuses on whether the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime before government inducement.
Question 5: A defendant, acting under a delusion that God commanded him to kill, kills his neighbor. He knew the act was killing but believed it was morally right. Under the M'Naghten test, is he legally insane?
- Yes, because he did not know the act was wrong (Correct answer)
- No, because he understood the physical nature of his act
- Yes, because he suffered from a mental disease
- No, because moral wrongfulness is irrelevant under M'Naghten
Correct answer: Yes, because he did not know the act was wrong
Under M'Naghten, a defendant is insane if, due to mental disease, he did not know that his act was wrong — believing God commanded it means he did not appreciate its wrongfulness.
Question 6: A defendant is charged with false pretenses after inducing the victim to transfer title to property by lying about his financial status. Which element distinguishes false pretenses from larceny by trick?
- The property must be real estate for false pretenses
- False pretenses requires transfer of title, not mere possession (Correct answer)
- Larceny by trick requires a written misrepresentation
- False pretenses applies only to future promises
Correct answer: False pretenses requires transfer of title, not mere possession
False pretenses requires that the defendant's misrepresentation caused the victim to transfer title to the property; larceny by trick only involves obtaining possession, not title.
Question 7: A defendant is charged with solicitation for asking a hitman to murder his business partner. The hitman refuses. Under the majority rule, is solicitation complete?
- No, because the hitman refused
- Yes, because solicitation is complete upon the asking, regardless of the response (Correct answer)
- No, because no agreement was reached
- Yes, only if the defendant paid or promised payment
Correct answer: Yes, because solicitation is complete upon the asking, regardless of the response
Solicitation is complete as soon as the defendant requests or encourages another to commit a crime, regardless of whether the other person agrees or acts.
Multistate Bar Exam Criminal Law 5
A defendant, acting as an accessory before the fact, helps plan a robbery but is not present when it occurs.
Under modern law, what is his liability?