NYLE Criminal Law & Procedure 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under New York law, which statement correctly describes the 'emergency exception' to the warrant requirement for searches?
- Police may search any time they believe a crime has been committed
- Police may enter without a warrant when there is an objectively reasonable basis to believe someone inside faces imminent danger (Correct answer)
- The exception applies only to fire emergencies
- Police must obtain telephonic approval before invoking the exception
Correct answer: Police may enter without a warrant when there is an objectively reasonable basis to believe someone inside faces imminent danger
The emergency doctrine permits warrantless entry when police have an objectively reasonable basis to believe that someone inside is in imminent danger requiring immediate assistance.
Question 2: Under New York's accomplice liability statute (PL § 20.00), a person is liable as an accomplice when they:
- Merely know about the crime in advance
- Intentionally aid, abet, solicit, or encourage another to commit the offense (Correct answer)
- Fail to report a crime they witnessed
- Receive stolen property after the crime
Correct answer: Intentionally aid, abet, solicit, or encourage another to commit the offense
Accomplice liability under PL § 20.00 requires that the person intentionally aid or encourage another's commission of the offense, sharing the mental culpability.
Question 3: At a Wade hearing in New York, a court determines whether:
- A confession was voluntarily given
- An identification procedure was unduly suggestive and, if so, whether the in-court identification has an independent source (Correct answer)
- Probable cause existed for an arrest
- Physical evidence should be suppressed under the Fourth Amendment
Correct answer: An identification procedure was unduly suggestive and, if so, whether the in-court identification has an independent source
A Wade hearing evaluates the constitutionality of pretrial identification procedures; if unduly suggestive, the court then determines whether an independent basis exists for an in-court identification.
Question 4: Under New York Penal Law, what is the primary distinction between larceny by trick and larceny by false pretenses?
- The value of property taken
- Whether the victim transferred title or merely possession (Correct answer)
- Whether a weapon was used
- Whether the victim was a business or an individual
Correct answer: Whether the victim transferred title or merely possession
Larceny by trick obtains only possession through deception, while larceny by false pretenses obtains title (ownership) through misrepresentation of material fact.
Question 5: In New York, a defendant who voluntarily becomes intoxicated and commits a crime may use voluntary intoxication as a defense only to negate:
- All mental culpability elements
- An element requiring intent or knowledge, but not recklessness (PL 15.05(3), 15.25) (Correct answer)
- Recklessness only
- Negligence only
Correct answer: An element requiring intent or knowledge, but not recklessness (PL 15.05(3), 15.25)
Under PL § 15.25 intoxication is not a defense as such, but evidence of intoxication may be offered whenever relevant to negate an element such as intent or knowledge. It cannot negate recklessness, because PL § 15.05(3) provides that a person who is unaware of a risk solely by reason of voluntary intoxication still acts recklessly.
Question 6: Under New York's Sandoval rule, before a defendant testifies at trial the court determines:
- Whether the defendant's prior convictions may be used to impeach credibility (Correct answer)
- Whether the defendant may call character witnesses
- Whether the prosecutor may call rebuttal witnesses
- Whether prior bad acts evidence is admissible in the prosecution's case-in-chief
Correct answer: Whether the defendant's prior convictions may be used to impeach credibility
A Sandoval hearing allows the court to rule in advance on which prior convictions or bad acts the prosecutor may use to impeach the defendant if they choose to testify.
Question 7: Under CPL § 220.10(3), where an indictment charges a single crime, a defendant may plead guilty to a lesser included offense only with:
- The permission of the court alone
- The consent of the People alone
- Both the permission of the court and the consent of the People (Correct answer)
- The consent of the victim
Correct answer: Both the permission of the court and the consent of the People
CPL § 220.10(3) allows a plea of guilty to a lesser included offense only with both the permission of the court and the consent of the People (subject to the minimum-plea limits in § 220.10(5)). The defendant may enter a plea of guilty to the entire indictment, or not guilty, as of right (§ 220.10(1)-(2)). The victim's consent is not required.
