I85PREP
⌘ K
FE-1 Criminal Law study materials
FE-1 Criminal Law study resources

FE-1 Criminal Law practice questions

One question at a time. Build your FE-1 Criminal Law understanding.

First 50 of 200 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1Criminal Law

Which mental state is required at common law for the crime of burglary of a dwelling at night with intent to commit a felony therein?

  1. Negligence regarding the owner's property rights
  2. Strict liability regardless of purpose
  3. Reckless disregard as to whether a felony might occur
  4. Intent to commit a felony at the time of entry Correct answer.

Explanation

Common-law burglary requires the specific intent to commit a felony inside the structure at the moment of entry. A later-formed intent does not satisfy the element, and lesser mental states such as recklessness or negligence are insufficient.

Question 2Criminal Law

A defendant breaks into a closed retail store at 2 a.m. intending to steal merchandise. Under the modern majority approach that extends burglary beyond dwellings, which element is most clearly satisfied?

  1. The defendant caused physical injury to an occupant
  2. The structure was a dwelling
  3. The entry was unauthorized and accompanied by intent to commit a crime inside Correct answer.
  4. The defendant carried a deadly weapon

Explanation

Modern statutes typically define burglary as unauthorized entry into a structure with intent to commit a crime therein, and many no longer limit the offense to dwellings or nighttime. The unauthorized entry plus contemporaneous intent to steal satisfies those elements. Weapon possession and injury are aggravating factors, not core elements.

Question 3Criminal Law

Which of the following best describes the actus reus of common-law larceny?

  1. The trespassory taking and carrying away of another's personal property with intent to permanently deprive Correct answer.
  2. The conversion of property entrusted to the defendant
  3. The temporary use of another's property without consent
  4. The permanent deprivation of another's property by deception

Explanation

Larceny requires a trespassory taking (caption) and carrying away (asportation) of another's personal property with the intent to permanently deprive. Deception describes false pretenses, temporary use is not larceny, and conversion of entrusted property is embezzlement.

Question 4Criminal Law

An employee lawfully receives cash from customers as part of her job and later decides to keep a portion for herself. Which offense most accurately describes her conduct?

  1. Larceny, because she took the money
  2. Embezzlement, because she converted property lawfully in her possession Correct answer.
  3. False pretenses, because she misrepresented her intent
  4. Robbery, because she used her position

Explanation

Embezzlement is the fraudulent conversion of property by one who has lawful possession of it. Because the employee received the cash lawfully, the taking is not trespassory and therefore not larceny; her later intent to keep it constitutes conversion.

Question 5Criminal Law

Which element distinguishes robbery from larceny?

  1. The property taken must be money
  2. The victim must be a merchant
  3. The taking must be accomplished by force or intimidation Correct answer.
  4. The taking must occur at night

Explanation

Robbery is aggravated larceny: it requires a taking of property from the person or presence of another by force or intimidation. The nature of the property, the time of day, and the victim's occupation are not distinguishing elements.

Question 6Criminal Law

A man points a realistic toy gun at a cashier and demands the contents of the register. The cashier, believing the gun is real, hands over the money. Which conclusion is most accurate?

  1. Robbery, because the victim reasonably perceived intimidation Correct answer.
  2. No robbery, because the gun was not real
  3. Attempted larceny only, because no force was used
  4. No crime, because the cashier was not physically harmed

Explanation

Robbery requires force or intimidation, not actual physical harm or a genuine weapon. Intimidation is measured by whether the victim reasonably perceived a threat, so a realistic toy gun displayed to frighten the cashier suffices.

Question 7Criminal Law

Which statement correctly states the common-law felony murder rule?

  1. A death caused during the commission of an inherently dangerous felony may constitute murder without proof of intent to kill Correct answer.
  2. Any death occurring during any misdemeanor is felony murder
  3. Felony murder applies only when the defendant personally killed the victim
  4. Felony murder requires proof of premeditation and deliberation

Explanation

The felony murder rule treats a killing committed during the perpetration of an inherently dangerous felony as murder, without requiring intent to kill. It is limited by doctrines such as the merger rule and the proximate cause requirement.

Question 8Criminal Law

A robber commits an armed bank robbery and, during the getaway, a police officer accidentally shoots and kills a bystander while firing at the robber. Under the proximate cause theory of felony murder, which outcome is most likely?

  1. The robber is liable only if the officer is convicted of a crime
  2. The robber is not liable because the officer fired the fatal shot
  3. The robber is liable because the death was a foreseeable result of the felony Correct answer.
  4. The robber is liable only if he intended the bystander's death

Explanation

Under the proximate cause theory, a felon is liable for deaths caused by third parties, including police, if the death is a foreseeable consequence of the felony. The felon's intent to kill the bystander is irrelevant under felony murder.

Question 9Criminal Law

Which of the following is the best example of first-degree premeditated murder?

  1. A man plans for a week and then poisons his business rival Correct answer.
  2. A driver kills a pedestrian while speeding recklessly
  3. A security guard negligently discharges a weapon, killing a customer
  4. A woman kills her husband in a sudden heat of passion after discovering infidelity

Explanation

First-degree premeditated murder requires a deliberate, premeditated intent to kill. Planning over time and carrying out the killing by poison reflects the deliberation and premeditation the offense requires.

Question 10Criminal Law

What distinguishes voluntary manslaughter from murder?

  1. Adequate provocation or an imperfect self-defense that mitigates the killing Correct answer.
  2. The killing occurring in a public place
  3. The victim's consent to the killing
  4. The absence of any intent to kill

Explanation

Voluntary manslaughter is an intentional killing mitigated by adequate provocation or an honest but unreasonable belief in the need for self-defense. These circumstances negate malice aforethought even though intent to kill exists.

Question 11Criminal Law

A defendant breaks into a home intending to commit larceny but is apprehended before taking anything. Which offense has he most clearly committed?

  1. Completed larceny
  2. Trespass with no criminal liability
  3. Burglary, because the intent existed at entry Correct answer.
  4. Attempted burglary only

Explanation

Burglary is complete upon entry with the requisite intent, even if the intended felony is never carried out. Because the entry and contemporaneous intent are established, the offense is complete without any taking.

Question 12Criminal Law

Which of the following is required for the crime of receiving stolen property?

  1. The property must be worth more than a statutory threshold in every jurisdiction
  2. The defendant must have paid fair market value
  3. The property must be received with knowledge that it was stolen Correct answer.
  4. The defendant must have personally stolen the property

Explanation

Receiving stolen property requires that the property be stolen, that the defendant receive possession or control of it, and that the defendant know it was stolen. The defendant need not be the thief, and value thresholds vary by statute.

Question 13Criminal Law

A woman obtains a loan by falsely stating that she owns a warehouse that is actually owned by a third party. The bank relies on the statement and disburses funds. Which offense best fits?

  1. Larceny by trick
  2. False pretenses Correct answer.
  3. Embezzlement
  4. Robbery

Explanation

False pretenses requires a misrepresentation of a past or existing fact that induces the victim to transfer title to property. Because the bank transferred title to the loan proceeds in reliance on a false statement of ownership, false pretenses applies.

Question 14Criminal Law

Which statement best captures the difference between larceny by trick and false pretenses?

  1. Larceny by trick obtains possession, while false pretenses obtains title Correct answer.
  2. False pretenses requires a written instrument in all cases
  3. Larceny by trick applies only to real property
  4. Larceny by trick requires force, while false pretenses does not

Explanation

The key distinction is what the victim intends to transfer: larceny by trick involves obtaining mere possession through deception, while false pretenses involves obtaining title. This distinction determines which offense applies.

Question 15Criminal Law

Which of the following is an element of arson at common law?

  1. Burning of a dwelling belonging to another Correct answer.
  2. Burning caused by negligence
  3. Burning of a structure owned by the defendant
  4. Burning of any personal property

Explanation

Common-law arson is the malicious burning of the dwelling of another. Malice means intentional or recklessly caused burning, and the dwelling must belong to someone other than the defendant.

Question 16Criminal Law

A defendant throws a lit match into a house intending to burn it, but the match extinguishes before causing any charring. Which offense has he committed?

  1. Completed arson
  2. Attempted arson Correct answer.
  3. No offense, because no damage occurred
  4. Reckless endangerment only

Explanation

Arson requires an actual burning, meaning some consumption or charring of the structure, however slight. Because no burning occurred, the offense is incomplete and constitutes attempted arson given the intent and substantial step.

Question 17Criminal Law

Which of the following best describes the actus reus of common-law assault?

  1. A threat made at any future time
  2. An attempted battery or placing another in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful contact Correct answer.
  3. A negligent act causing emotional distress
  4. An intentional act causing physical injury

Explanation

Assault at common law is either an attempted battery or an intentional act placing the victim in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact. Physical injury is not required, and the threatened contact must be imminent rather than remote.

Question 18Criminal Law

A man swings his fist at a woman intending to hit her, but she ducks and he misses. Which offense has he most clearly committed?

  1. Assault Correct answer.
  2. No offense, because no contact occurred
  3. Battery
  4. Attempted murder

Explanation

An attempted battery constitutes assault even when no contact results. Because the man intended harmful contact and took a direct step toward it, the completed offense of assault is established.

Question 19Criminal Law

Which of the following is required for a valid claim of self-defense?

  1. The threat must have already passed
  2. The defendant must retreat in all jurisdictions
  3. The defendant must have been the initial aggressor
  4. The force used must be reasonable and necessary to repel an imminent threat Correct answer.

Explanation

Self-defense requires a reasonable belief that force is necessary to repel an imminent unlawful threat, and the force used must be proportional. The initial aggressor generally loses the defense, and retreat is not universally required.

Question 20Criminal Law

A defendant is charged with murder and argues he acted under duress because a co-actor threatened him with future harm. Which statement is most accurate?

  1. Duress is generally not a defense to intentional homicide Correct answer.
  2. Duress requires proof that the defendant acted in self-defense
  3. Duress applies only if the threat was immediate and the victim was the aggressor
  4. Duress is a complete defense to murder

Explanation

At common law, duress is not a defense to intentional homicide, though it may excuse other crimes. The defense also generally requires a threat of imminent death or serious bodily harm, which a future threat may not satisfy.

Question 21Criminal Law

Which of the following best describes the defense of necessity?

  1. It justifies conduct to avoid a greater harm and is generally unavailable for homicide Correct answer.
  2. It applies only when the harm avoided was caused by the defendant
  3. It requires the defendant to have acted under a threat of future harm
  4. It excuses any crime if the defendant believed it was necessary

Explanation

Necessity justifies conduct undertaken to avoid a greater harm, but the defense is generally unavailable when the harm avoided is less serious than the harm caused, and it typically cannot justify homicide.

Question 22Criminal Law

A defendant is charged with murder but was severely intoxicated at the time of the killing. Which statement about the intoxication defense is most accurate?

  1. Intoxication is irrelevant to mens rea
  2. Voluntary intoxication may negate specific intent but not general intent Correct answer.
  3. Involuntary intoxication is never a defense
  4. Voluntary intoxication is a complete defense to all crimes

Explanation

Voluntary intoxication may negate the specific intent required for certain offenses but does not excuse general-intent crimes. Involuntary intoxication can, in some jurisdictions, serve as a broader defense if it renders the defendant unable to form the required mens rea.

Question 23Criminal Law

Which of the following is required for the defense of entrapment under the objective approach?

  1. Government conduct created a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by an otherwise innocent person Correct answer.
  2. The defendant was predisposed to commit the crime
  3. The police used only lawful investigative techniques
  4. The defendant initiated contact with the police

Explanation

The objective approach focuses on the government's conduct, asking whether it created a substantial risk that an otherwise innocent person would commit the offense. The subjective approach instead examines the defendant's predisposition.

Question 24Criminal Law

Which of the following best describes the difference between accomplice liability and conspiracy?

  1. Accomplice liability requires assistance to the principal, while conspiracy requires an agreement to commit a crime Correct answer.
  2. Accomplice liability requires an agreement, while conspiracy does not
  3. Both require the completion of the target offense
  4. Conspiracy requires physical assistance, while accomplice liability does not

Explanation

Accomplice liability attaches when a person aids, abets, or encourages the principal with the intent to facilitate the crime. Conspiracy is a separate inchoate offense requiring an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime, and it does not require completion of the target offense.

Question 25Criminal Law

A man agrees with a friend to rob a store, but before they act, the friend withdraws and the man is arrested. Which offense has the man most clearly committed?

  1. Completed robbery
  2. Conspiracy to commit robbery Correct answer.
  3. No offense, because the robbery never occurred
  4. Attempted murder

Explanation

Conspiracy is complete upon the agreement plus an overt act where required, even if the target crime is never carried out. The man's agreement to commit robbery establishes conspiracy notwithstanding the friend's withdrawal.

Question 26Criminal Law

Which mental state at common law is required for the crime of burglary?

  1. Intent to commit a felony therein at the time of entry Correct answer.
  2. Intent formed only after the entry is complete
  3. Reckless disregard of the risk that a felony might occur
  4. Negligence regarding the owner's property rights

Explanation

Common-law burglary requires a breaking and entering of a dwelling at night with intent to commit a felony inside. The intent must exist at the moment of entry, so a later-formed intent cannot supply the element.

Question 27Criminal Law

A man takes a coat from a restaurant coatroom, mistakenly believing it is his own, though it belongs to a patron. He later realizes the error and keeps the coat. Which statement is correct?

  1. He committed embezzlement because he had custody of the coat
  2. He committed larceny at the moment he picked up the coat
  3. He committed no crime because the initial taking was innocent
  4. He committed larceny when he decided to keep the coat after discovering the mistake Correct answer.

Explanation

Larceny requires a trespassory taking and carrying away with intent to permanently deprive at the time of taking. When the original taking is innocent, a later decision to keep the property can constitute larceny if the defendant still has the property in his possession.

Question 28Criminal Law

Which statement correctly describes the common-law doctrine of transferred intent?

  1. It transfers liability from the principal to an accomplice who aided the act
  2. It shifts the mens rea from the intended victim to the actual victim of the same act Correct answer.
  3. It converts an attempted battery into a completed battery regardless of harm
  4. It allows intent to be inferred from the defendant's subsequent conduct

Explanation

Transferred intent holds that when a defendant intends to harm one person but accidentally harms another, the mens rea transfers to the actual victim. The defendant remains liable for the crime as if the intended victim had been harmed.

Question 29Criminal Law

A woman leaves her infant in a locked car on a hot day while she shops for several hours, knowing the child will likely suffer serious harm. The child dies. Which theory best supports a murder conviction?

  1. Depraved-heart murder based on extreme recklessness Correct answer.
  2. Involuntary manslaughter based on criminal negligence
  3. Voluntary manslaughter based on heat of passion
  4. Felony murder based on the underlying offense of child neglect

Explanation

Depraved-heart murder requires conduct showing an abandoned and malignant heart, i.e., extreme recklessness creating a very high risk of death. Leaving an infant in a locked car in heat with knowledge of likely serious harm fits that standard.

Question 30Criminal Law

Which of the following is an element of the crime of kidnapping at common law?

  1. Confinement of a person without consent and against the law Correct answer.
  2. Use of a deadly weapon during the taking
  3. Transportation of the victim across state lines
  4. A demand for ransom made to a third party

Explanation

Common-law kidnapping requires the unlawful confinement and movement of a person without consent. The essence of the offense is the non-consensual confinement, not any particular motive or method.

Question 31Criminal Law

A man has consensual sex with a woman who, unknown to him, is legally incapable of consenting because of a statutory age provision. He honestly and reasonably believed she was older. Under the traditional common-law approach to statutory rape, which statement is correct?

  1. His mistake of age is irrelevant because statutory rape is a strict-liability offense Correct answer.
  2. His mistake reduces the offense to a misdemeanor
  3. His mistake negates the actus reus and requires acquittal
  4. His reasonable mistake of age is a complete defense

Explanation

Statutory rape is traditionally treated as a strict-liability crime as to the victim's age, so a reasonable mistake about age is no defense. The policy protects minors by removing the mental state requirement regarding age.

Question 32Criminal Law

Which statement best describes the M'Naghten test for insanity?

  1. The defendant could not control his conduct despite knowing it was wrong
  2. The defendant's act was the product of a mental disease or defect
  3. The defendant lacked substantial capacity to appreciate wrongfulness or conform his conduct
  4. At the time of the act, the defendant did not know the nature and quality of the act or that it was wrong Correct answer.

Explanation

M'Naghten asks whether, at the time of the act, the defendant knew the nature and quality of the act or knew it was wrong. It is a cognitive test focused on knowledge, not volitional control.

Question 33Criminal Law

A defendant is charged with battery for shoving a stranger during an argument. He claims he was acting in defense of a third party who, he reasonably but mistakenly believed, was being attacked. Which statement is correct?

  1. The defense applies if he reasonably believed the third party needed protection Correct answer.
  2. The defense fails because the third party was not actually in danger
  3. The defense applies only if the third party was his relative
  4. The defense fails because defense of others never justifies force against a person

Explanation

Defense of others permits reasonable force when the defendant reasonably believes another person is being unlawfully attacked. A reasonable mistake about the need for intervention does not defeat the defense under the majority rule.

Question 34Criminal Law

Which of the following best states the common-law rule on the year-and-a-day rule for homicide?

  1. A killing is murder only if the victim dies within a year and a day of the act Correct answer.
  2. A killing is a felony only if the victim dies within a year and a day of the act, unless the statute says otherwise
  3. The rule requires the prosecution to prove the victim died within a day of the act
  4. The rule applies only to involuntary manslaughter

Explanation

At common law, a death occurring more than a year and a day after the act was not considered caused by that act for homicide purposes. Many jurisdictions have abolished or modified the rule by statute.

Question 35Criminal Law

A woman shoots at a man intending to kill him, but her bullet misses and instead destroys a valuable vase behind him. Which offense has she most clearly committed?

  1. Attempted murder of the man and malicious destruction of property Correct answer.
  2. No offense, because the intended victim was unharmed
  3. Murder because her intent transferred to the vase
  4. Assault only, because no one was injured

Explanation

She took a substantial step with intent to kill, completing attempted murder, and her act caused the malicious destruction of property. Transferred intent does not apply because the harm that occurred is to property, not to a person.

Question 36Criminal Law

Which statement correctly describes the common-law rule on the defense of voluntary intoxication?

  1. It can negate malice aforethought and reduce murder to manslaughter
  2. It can negate the specific intent required for a crime but not the malice in murder Correct answer.
  3. It is never admissible for any purpose
  4. It is a complete defense to all crimes requiring intent

Explanation

Voluntary intoxication may negate the specific intent required for a crime but does not negate general intent or malice. Because murder requires malice, voluntary intoxication generally does not reduce murder to manslaughter.

Question 37Criminal Law

A man agrees with two others to commit a burglary. Before the burglary occurs, he tells the others he is out and does nothing further. The others commit the burglary. Which statement is correct about his liability?

  1. He may avoid accomplice liability if he communicated his withdrawal and did all he could to neutralize his prior assistance Correct answer.
  2. He is liable as an accomplice because the agreement was never formally revoked
  3. He is liable for conspiracy only, not for the burglary
  4. He is automatically liable for the burglary because conspiracy continues until the crime is committed

Explanation

A conspirator who withdraws before the crime can avoid liability for subsequent crimes if he communicates withdrawal and takes steps to neutralize prior aid. Mere inaction or a private decision is insufficient.

Question 38Criminal Law

Which of the following is the best example of the crime of solicitation?

  1. A man agrees with a friend to burn down a store
  2. A man helps a friend burn down a store
  3. A man buys matches intending to burn down a store himself
  4. A man asks a friend to burn down a rival's store and offers to pay him Correct answer.

Explanation

Solicitation is the asking, encouraging, or requesting another person to commit a crime with the intent that the crime be committed. The offense is complete upon the request, even if the other person refuses.

Question 39Criminal Law

A defendant is charged with robbery. He took a wallet from a victim by threatening immediate force. Which additional element distinguishes robbery from larceny?

  1. The taking must occur at night
  2. The property taken must be of substantial value
  3. The victim must be a stranger to the defendant
  4. The taking must be accomplished by force or intimidation Correct answer.

Explanation

Robbery is larceny plus the use of force or intimidation to take property from the person or presence of another. The force or threat must be used to obtain the property.

Question 40Criminal Law

A defendant is charged with arson after setting fire to a vacant apartment building he owns, intending to collect insurance. Which statement is correct under the modern approach?

  1. He can be convicted only if the fire spread to an adjoining building
  2. He cannot be convicted because he owned the building
  3. He can be convicted because modern arson statutes extend to structures beyond dwellings Correct answer.
  4. He cannot be convicted because the building was vacant

Explanation

Modern arson statutes typically extend beyond the common-law dwelling-house requirement to cover structures such as commercial buildings. Ownership and vacancy do not defeat liability under those statutes.

Question 41Criminal Law

Which statement best describes the defense of infancy at common law?

  1. A child under ten could be convicted of any felony
  2. A child between seven and fourteen was treated as an adult
  3. A child under seven had no criminal capacity Correct answer.
  4. A child under fourteen was conclusively presumed capable

Explanation

At common law, children under seven were conclusively presumed incapable of committing a crime. Children between seven and fourteen were rebuttably presumed incapable, and those over fourteen were treated as adults.

Question 42Criminal Law

A man breaks into a warehouse at night intending to steal copper wire but is caught before taking anything. Which offense has he most clearly committed?

  1. Robbery
  2. Burglary Correct answer.
  3. Embezzlement
  4. Larceny

Explanation

Burglary is complete upon breaking and entering a structure with intent to commit a felony inside, even if the felony is never carried out. The absence of a completed theft does not defeat burglary.

Question 43Criminal Law

Which statement correctly describes the common-law doctrine of accomplice liability?

  1. An accomplice is liable only if he was physically present at the crime scene
  2. An accomplice is liable for the crime he aided or encouraged and for reasonably foreseeable crimes committed in the course of that crime Correct answer.
  3. An accomplice is liable only for the crime he personally intended to commit
  4. An accomplice is liable only if he was paid for his assistance

Explanation

An accomplice is liable for the crime he aided or encouraged and for other crimes that are the natural and probable consequence of the intended crime. Physical presence and payment are not required.

Question 44Criminal Law

A woman is charged with murder. She claims she acted in self-defense but used deadly force against an attacker who was only shouting insults at her. Which statement is correct?

  1. Deadly force is justified because she was the initial aggressor
  2. Deadly force is not justified because mere words do not create a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious harm Correct answer.
  3. Deadly force is justified if she subjectively feared for her life
  4. Deadly force is justified only if she first tried to retreat

Explanation

Self-defense requires a reasonable belief that deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm. Words alone, however insulting, do not justify deadly force.

Question 45Criminal Law

Which of the following best describes the crime of extortion at common law?

  1. The conversion of property entrusted to the defendant
  2. The fraudulent obtaining of property by false pretenses
  3. The taking of property from a person by immediate force
  4. The unlawful taking of property by a public official through threat of arrest or prosecution Correct answer.

Explanation

Common-law extortion is the corrupt taking of property by a public official under color of office through threats such as arrest or prosecution. Modern statutes often broaden the offense to cover private actors.

Question 46Criminal Law

A defendant is charged with receiving stolen property. Which statement is correct about the required knowledge?

  1. The defendant must know the identity of the thief
  2. The defendant must know the property was stolen at the time he received it Correct answer.
  3. The defendant must have paid below market value
  4. The defendant must have been present at the original theft

Explanation

Receiving stolen property requires that the defendant receive, possess, or control property he knows or believes to be stolen. Knowledge of the thief's identity and the price paid are not elements.

Question 47Criminal Law

A man is charged with attempted murder. He bought a gun, drove to the victim's house, and was arrested while parked outside before loading the gun. Which statement best reflects the substantial-step test?

  1. He is not liable because he had not yet loaded the gun
  2. He is liable only if he fired at least one shot
  3. He is liable if his conduct strongly corroborates his criminal purpose and goes beyond mere preparation Correct answer.
  4. He is not liable because attempt requires the completion of the crime

Explanation

The substantial-step test asks whether the defendant's conduct goes beyond mere preparation and strongly corroborates the criminal purpose. Buying a gun and traveling to the victim's house can satisfy that standard.

Question 48Criminal Law

Which statement correctly describes the common-law crime of mayhem?

  1. It applies only to injuries inflicted with a deadly weapon
  2. It applies only to injuries to the head
  3. It requires only a temporary injury
  4. It requires the permanent disfigurement or disabling of a body part that affects the victim's ability to fight Correct answer.

Explanation

Common-law mayhem requires violently depriving the victim of a body part or permanently disfiguring or disabling it in a way that impairs the ability to fight. Temporary injuries do not qualify.

Question 49Criminal Law

A woman is charged with murder after her boyfriend dies from a drug overdose. She supplied the drugs but was not present when he injected himself. Which theory of homicide liability is most directly implicated?

  1. Murder based on transferred intent
  2. Murder based on the year-and-a-day rule
  3. Murder based on causation, because she supplied the fatal dose Correct answer.
  4. Felony murder based on drug distribution

Explanation

Homicide liability requires proof that the defendant's conduct was the actual and proximate cause of death. Supplying the fatal dose can support causation, though the victim's voluntary injection raises intervening-cause questions.

Question 50Criminal Law

Which statement best describes the common-law rule on the defense of duress as a defense to murder?

  1. Duress is a complete defense to murder
  2. Duress is not a defense to intentional murder Correct answer.
  3. Duress applies only if the threat was to property
  4. Duress requires a threat of future economic harm

Explanation

At common law, duress is not a defense to intentional homicide; a person is expected to sacrifice his own life rather than take an innocent life. Duress may be a defense to other crimes when the threat is of imminent death or serious harm.