Criminal Law (Bar Exam) with Complete
Solutions
Jurisdiction - ANS-A state will have jurisdiction if (i) any act constituting an element of
the offense was committed in the state; (ii) an act outside the state caused a result in
the state; (iii) attempt or conspiracy + an act inside the state; or (iv) attempt to
conspiracy inside our outside the state.
Merger - ANS-Conspiracy does not merge with the completed offense, so you can be
convicted of both; but solicitation and attempt do merge.
Double Jeopardy - ANS-Cannot be convicted for a lesser included offense, but separate
punishment for statutorily defined offenses may be handed down at the same time
Omission as an Act - ANS-An omission can be the requisite act when: (i) there is a legal
duty to act; (ii) D has knowledge of the facts giving rise to the duty; and (iii) it is
reasonably possible to perform the duty
Principal and Accomplice - ANS-Principal is the person who commits the illegal act or
who causes an innocent agent to do so; they are liable for the principal crime.
An accomplice is a person who aids or encourages the principal to commit the illegal
act; they are liable for the principal crime if they intended to aid or encourage the crime.
Accomplice must act with intent and the crimes must be probable or foreseeable. Mere
knowledge that a crime may result from aid is insufficient, where aid involves sale of
ordinary goods at ordinary prices.
An accessory after the fact is a person who aids another to escape knowing he has
committed a felony; they are liable for only being an accessory after the fact.
Solicitation - ANS-Inciting, counseling, advising, urging, or commanding another to
commit a crime with the intent that the person solicited commit the crime; they need not
commit the crime or respond affirmatively. Solicited and solicitor can be held liable for
the crime.
Conspiracy - ANS-The elements of conspiracy are: (i) an agreement between two or
more persons; (ii) an intent to enter into the agreement; and (iii) an intent to achieve the
objective of the agreement.
Modern, unilateral, MPC: Only one party needs genuine, criminal intent. Overt act
required, mere preparation is usually enough.
, Traditional, bilateral, common law: At least two "guilty minds" are required. Acquittal of
all other conspirators precludes conviction of remaining D. If two or more people are
required to commit the offense, more people need to be included to conspire. No overt
act required.
Conspiracy is a specific intent crime, so the parties must have: (i) the intent to agree;
and (ii) the intent to achieve the objective of the conspiracy.
Liable for co-conspirators crimes if they were committed (i) in furtherance of the
conspiracy; and (ii) foreseeable.
Withdrawal is only effective if perform an affirmative act that notifies all parties of
withdrawal, but if has provided assistance, will need to neutralize that assistance. But
it's usually not a defense to the conspiracy, which occurs once there is agreement + act,
but may be a defense to crimes committed in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Attempt - ANS-Attempt is an act done with intent to commit a crime that falls short of
completing the crime. D must intend to perform an an act and obtain a result that would
be a crime; it always requires specific intent even if the completed offense only requires
general intent.
Attempt requires something more than mere preparation. MPC and most states follow
the "substantial sept" test (higher bar than conspiracy).
Defenses: legal impossibility (all steps intended would not be a crime), factual
impossibility is not a defense, abandonment is a defense under MPC but not common
law
Insanity Defense Test - ANS-1. M'Naghten Rule: D acquitted if: (i) a disease of the
mind; (ii) caused a defect of reason; (iii) such that D lacked the ability at the time of his
actions either know the wrongfulness of his actions or understand the nature and quality
of his actions. Loss of control due to mental illness is not a defense.
2. Irresistible Impulse: Because of a mental illness, D was unable to control his actions
or conform his conduct to the law.
3. Durham Test: Crime was a product of D's mental illness; only followed in NH.
4. ALI/MPC: Because of a mental disease/defect, D lacked the substantial capacity to:
(i) appreciate the criminality of his conduct; or (ii) conform his conduct to a requirement
of the law.
Insanity Defense Details - ANS-1. Defense may be raised at arraignment, but failing to
do so until later does not waive defense.
2. When D does not raise the defense, he can refuse a court-ordered psychiatric exam
Solutions
Jurisdiction - ANS-A state will have jurisdiction if (i) any act constituting an element of
the offense was committed in the state; (ii) an act outside the state caused a result in
the state; (iii) attempt or conspiracy + an act inside the state; or (iv) attempt to
conspiracy inside our outside the state.
Merger - ANS-Conspiracy does not merge with the completed offense, so you can be
convicted of both; but solicitation and attempt do merge.
Double Jeopardy - ANS-Cannot be convicted for a lesser included offense, but separate
punishment for statutorily defined offenses may be handed down at the same time
Omission as an Act - ANS-An omission can be the requisite act when: (i) there is a legal
duty to act; (ii) D has knowledge of the facts giving rise to the duty; and (iii) it is
reasonably possible to perform the duty
Principal and Accomplice - ANS-Principal is the person who commits the illegal act or
who causes an innocent agent to do so; they are liable for the principal crime.
An accomplice is a person who aids or encourages the principal to commit the illegal
act; they are liable for the principal crime if they intended to aid or encourage the crime.
Accomplice must act with intent and the crimes must be probable or foreseeable. Mere
knowledge that a crime may result from aid is insufficient, where aid involves sale of
ordinary goods at ordinary prices.
An accessory after the fact is a person who aids another to escape knowing he has
committed a felony; they are liable for only being an accessory after the fact.
Solicitation - ANS-Inciting, counseling, advising, urging, or commanding another to
commit a crime with the intent that the person solicited commit the crime; they need not
commit the crime or respond affirmatively. Solicited and solicitor can be held liable for
the crime.
Conspiracy - ANS-The elements of conspiracy are: (i) an agreement between two or
more persons; (ii) an intent to enter into the agreement; and (iii) an intent to achieve the
objective of the agreement.
Modern, unilateral, MPC: Only one party needs genuine, criminal intent. Overt act
required, mere preparation is usually enough.
, Traditional, bilateral, common law: At least two "guilty minds" are required. Acquittal of
all other conspirators precludes conviction of remaining D. If two or more people are
required to commit the offense, more people need to be included to conspire. No overt
act required.
Conspiracy is a specific intent crime, so the parties must have: (i) the intent to agree;
and (ii) the intent to achieve the objective of the conspiracy.
Liable for co-conspirators crimes if they were committed (i) in furtherance of the
conspiracy; and (ii) foreseeable.
Withdrawal is only effective if perform an affirmative act that notifies all parties of
withdrawal, but if has provided assistance, will need to neutralize that assistance. But
it's usually not a defense to the conspiracy, which occurs once there is agreement + act,
but may be a defense to crimes committed in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Attempt - ANS-Attempt is an act done with intent to commit a crime that falls short of
completing the crime. D must intend to perform an an act and obtain a result that would
be a crime; it always requires specific intent even if the completed offense only requires
general intent.
Attempt requires something more than mere preparation. MPC and most states follow
the "substantial sept" test (higher bar than conspiracy).
Defenses: legal impossibility (all steps intended would not be a crime), factual
impossibility is not a defense, abandonment is a defense under MPC but not common
law
Insanity Defense Test - ANS-1. M'Naghten Rule: D acquitted if: (i) a disease of the
mind; (ii) caused a defect of reason; (iii) such that D lacked the ability at the time of his
actions either know the wrongfulness of his actions or understand the nature and quality
of his actions. Loss of control due to mental illness is not a defense.
2. Irresistible Impulse: Because of a mental illness, D was unable to control his actions
or conform his conduct to the law.
3. Durham Test: Crime was a product of D's mental illness; only followed in NH.
4. ALI/MPC: Because of a mental disease/defect, D lacked the substantial capacity to:
(i) appreciate the criminality of his conduct; or (ii) conform his conduct to a requirement
of the law.
Insanity Defense Details - ANS-1. Defense may be raised at arraignment, but failing to
do so until later does not waive defense.
2. When D does not raise the defense, he can refuse a court-ordered psychiatric exam
