crinminal law from notes

Under common law, what are the elements of rape?

Intentional unlawful carnal knowledge by a man of a woman, by force or fear of force, without consent; penile-vaginal penetration required.

Under common law, did consent given at the start of intercourse remain effective after a withdrawal?

Yes, according to the in-class model answer; modern statutes recognize withdrawal of consent. Note: the lecture guide conflicts with the model answer on modern withdrawal.

Under common law, can a husband be guilty of raping his wife?

No. The historical marital exemption treated marriage as consent; modern statutes eliminate this exemption.

A man threatens a woman and penetrates her only with his fingers. Common-law rape? Modern rape?

Not common-law rape: penile-vaginal penetration was required. Probably rape under modern statutes: slight penetration by other means can suffice.

A victim silently pushes the defendant away during intercourse; he knows she resisted. Modern rape?

Probably yes if a reasonable person would have known consent was absent; the model answer emphasizes objectively assessed consent.

A person is unconscious during intercourse. Can they consent under common law or modern statutes?

No under either: an unconscious person cannot consent.

A therapist fraudulently says intercourse is necessary treatment and the patient agrees. Valid consent?

No according to the worksheet model answer: consent obtained by fraud is not actual consent.

Under Kentucky statute, when does intercourse with a physically helpless person constitute first-degree rape?

When the victim is incapable of consenting because physically helpless; this is one of the first-degree grounds.

Under Kentucky statute, defendant age 16 and victim age 10: which rape degree?

First degree: intercourse with a child under 12 qualifies, regardless of the defendant being under 18 in the model scenario.

Under Kentucky statute, defendant age 19 and victim age 13: which rape degree?

Second degree: defendant 18 or older and victim under 14.

Under Kentucky statute, defendant age 22 and victim age 15: which rape degree?

Third degree: defendant 21 or older and victim under 16.

Under Kentucky statute, intercourse with a victim unable to understand consent due to mental incapacity: degree?

Third-degree rape under the model answers.

What does a modern rape-shield law generally prohibit?

Introducing a victim’s prior sexual history as evidence that they consented; evidence may be admissible for other purposes.

Under common law, was a victim’s prior sexual history admissible to argue consent?

Yes according to the model answer; modern rape-shield laws generally forbid this purpose.

Under original common law, which consensual acts constituted sodomy?

Anal intercourse between two males, even if consensual.

Under many statutes around 1950, could consensual private oral sex between adult women constitute sodomy?

Yes; many statutes broadened sodomy to oral sex and different genders, including married couples.

What is the key rule of Lawrence v. Texas (2003)?

Government cannot criminalize private consensual sexual acts between adults under substantive due process; does not protect nonconsensual conduct or acts involving minors.

Under New York sexual abuse statute, what is sexual contact?

Touching sexual or other intimate parts for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire; penetration not required.

Under New York statute, adult uses threat of force to obtain sexual touching: degree?

First-degree sexual abuse, based on forcible compulsion.

Under New York statute, 17-year-old sexually touches a consenting 10-year-old: degree?

First-degree sexual abuse: victim under 11.

Under New York statute, 16-year-old sexually touches a consenting 13-year-old: degree?

Second-degree sexual abuse: victim under 14.

Under New York statute, adult sexually touches another adult without consent but without force: degree?

Third-degree sexual abuse according to the in-class model answer.

Under New York statute, age 22 and 16 with consensual sexual contact: offense?

Third-degree sexual abuse according to the problem-set model answer; age gap exceeds five years.

Under New York statute, ages 20 and 16 with otherwise consensual sexual contact: offense?

No crime in the model answer; age gap less than five years.

Under Washington statute, victim 16–17: what age difference triggers the offense?

Five or more years, for otherwise consensual contact.

Under Washington statute, victim 14–15: what age difference triggers the offense?

Four or more years.

Under Washington statute, victim 12–13: what age difference triggers the offense?

Three or more years.

Under Washington statute, victim 11 or younger: what age difference triggers the offense?

Two or more years.

Under Washington statute, ages 16 and 13: which person commits the offense?

The 16-year-old: a three-year age gap with a 13-year-old meets the threshold.

Under Washington statute, victim 15: oldest permitted partner age in worksheet?

18; at age 19 the difference would be four years and meet the threshold.

Under Washington statute, victim 13: oldest permitted partner age in worksheet?

15; at age 16 the difference would be three years.

Under Washington statute, victim 17: oldest permitted partner age in worksheet?

21; at age 22 the difference would be five years.

Under Texas statute, what distinguishes public lewdness from indecent exposure?

Public lewdness involves specified sexual acts/contact; indecent exposure involves exposing genitals or anus with sexual-arousal intent and recklessness about offending others.

Under Texas statute, clothed couple engages in sexual touching in a movie theater: offense?

Public lewdness; nudity is not required when sexual contact occurs in public.

Under Texas statute, a nude person in a park solely for comfort, not sexual arousal: indecent exposure?

No according to model answer: sexual arousal or gratification intent is required.

Under Texas statute, exposing only breasts with sexual intent: indecent exposure?

No in the worksheet scenario: the statute concerns genitals or anus, not breasts alone.

Under Texas statute, nude in unlocked shared lounge to arouse partner, with risk others enter: offense?

Indecent exposure: sexual-arousal purpose and reckless disregard of another person’s presence.

Under common law, list four core elements of arson.

Malicious/intentional burning of a dwelling house (including curtilage buildings) possessed by another; structural material must actually burn.

For common-law arson, do soot stains or burned furniture alone count as burning?

No. Some structural part of the building must be consumed by fire; smoke stains or furniture damage alone are insufficient.

For common-law arson, does burning a few inches of the wall qualify?

Yes. Any consumption of structural material by fire suffices; no minimum amount is needed.

A person accidentally causes a house fire by careless candle use. Common-law arson?

No; common-law arson requires malicious or intentional burning, not mere negligence.

A person intentionally burns their own occupied house out of spite. Common-law arson?

No: the dwelling must be possessed by another.

A person maliciously burns a detached garage used by household occupants. Common-law arson?

Yes if within the dwelling’s curtilage; nearby buildings used for occupants’ personal purposes count.

A person intentionally burns a commercial office building. Common-law arson?

No under the professor’s common-law definition: it must be a dwelling or building within its curtilage.

A person intends to burn A’s house, but fire spreads and burns B’s house. Common-law arson?

Yes according to the problem-set key: malicious intent can transfer from one victim to another.

A person intends to burn woods but instead burns a building. Does arson intent transfer between structures?

No according to the lecture guide: intent transfers between owners, not from one structure to another.

California arson: which punishment if bodily injury results?

5, 7, or 9 years; the most serious category in the model answers.

California arson: which punishment for an inhabited structure without injury?

3, 5, or 8 years.

California arson: which punishment for forest land or uninhabited structure without injury?

2, 4, or 6 years.

California arson: which punishment for another’s personal property without injury?

16 months, 2 years, or 3 years, according to the model answer.

California arson: is deliberately burning only your own coat an offense?

Generally no, unless intent to defraud or injury to another person or property applies.

Under modern arson rules, may a landlord commit arson by burning a rented building?

Yes: possession belongs to the tenant, not the landlord.

Under modern arson statutes, may burning one’s own insured building for a payout be arson?

Yes: modern statutes commonly include intent to defraud an insurer.

What is malicious mischief under the study guide?

Willful, unlawful injury or destruction of another’s real or personal property with malicious intent to injure the owner.

Under Florida malicious mischief statute, does graffiti qualify?

Yes. The statute expressly includes graffiti or vandalism of another’s property.

Florida malicious mischief: $600 damage is which severity category?

Middle category; the model answers use $200 and $1,000 as the thresholds.

Under Missouri property damage statute, what determines first versus second degree for ordinary damage?

Value of damage; over $750 is first degree (felony) under the model answer.

Under Missouri property damage statute, damage over $1,000 to defraud an insurer: degree?

First-degree property damage, a Class D felony.

Under common law, when does trespass become a crime rather than only a tort?

When knowing/unjustified interference with another’s land involves force or violence (breach of peace).

A person climbs a posted fence without damaging it. Common-law trespass crime?

No in the model scenario: civil tort, but not a crime without force or violence.

A person smashes a posted fence and enters. Common-law trespass crime?

Yes: force or violence makes it criminal; the owner may also sue for the tort.

Under Texas statute, must criminal trespass involve force or violence?

No; entering or remaining without effective consent after qualifying notice can suffice.

Under Texas statute, what can count as notice against entry?

Owner/agent oral or written notice, fence, sign, visible crops, or qualifying purple paint markings.

Under Texas statute, is being told to leave and then remaining relevant to trespass?

Yes: notice to depart followed by failure to leave satisfies the notice alternative.

Under common law, what are the elements of burglary?

Breaking and entering another’s dwelling at nighttime without permission, with intent to commit a felony inside.

Under common-law burglary, is opening a closed unlocked door a breaking?

Yes: moving the door to enter satisfies breaking; physical damage is not required.

Under common-law burglary, does walking through an already open door count as breaking?

No: no barrier was moved.

Under common-law burglary, does opening a door without entering complete burglary?

No: entry requires some part of the defendant’s body to enter.

Under common-law burglary, must the intended felony actually be completed?

No. Intent to commit the felony at entry is enough if all other elements are met.

Under common-law burglary, breaking into a store at midnight to steal: burglary?

No: a store is not a dwelling under common law; most modern statutes broaden covered buildings.

Under common-law burglary, breaking into a house at noon to steal: burglary?

No: nighttime is required; most modern statutes remove this requirement.

Under common-law burglary, entering a home at night only to prank occupants: burglary?

No: there is no intent to commit a felony inside.

Under common-law burglary, can a defendant commit burglary and larceny in the same entry?

Yes: burglary occurs on qualifying entry with intent; larceny occurs if property is then taken and carried away.

Under Ohio burglary model answers, what makes aggravated burglary first-degree?

Intent to commit a theft-related offense plus injury, under the worksheet’s explanation; see source discrepancy note.

Under Ohio burglary model answers, what makes second-degree burglary?

Intent to commit crime plus another person present, or habitation with another likely present (worksheet explanation).

Under Ohio burglary model answers, what makes third-degree burglary?

Intent to commit a criminal offense inside without second-degree aggravating factors.

Under Ohio burglary model answers, what makes fourth-degree burglary?

Unlawful entry into a habitation with someone present or likely present, without another criminal intent in the model scenarios.

Ohio scenario: office entry to commit grand larceny; nobody present or likely. Burglary degree?

Third-degree felony according to worksheet model answer.

Ohio scenario: entry into habitation intending arson; occupant present, no injury. Degree?

Second-degree felony according to worksheet model answer.

Ohio scenario: entry into house for fun; occupant could likely be present. Degree?

Fourth-degree felony according to worksheet model answer.

Under professor’s common-law larceny definition, list the elements.

Trespassory taking and carrying away of goods possessed by another, without consent, intending permanent deprivation or conversion.

What is asportation for common-law larceny?

Carrying away: even slight movement of property to another location suffices.

Someone lifts keys intending to steal a car, then drops keys without moving. Larceny?

No in the model answer: no carrying away/asportation.

Someone takes a car without consent intending to return it after one day, but accidentally totals it. Larceny?

No under the model answer: no intent to permanently deprive at the time of taking.

Owner texts “take my car, I hate it”; recipient keeps it. Larceny?

No: the owner consented to the taking.

According to professor’s model answer, is stealing cash common-law larceny?

No according to this course’s key: common-law larceny covered tangible goods/chattels but not money; modern statutes include money.

What extra elements distinguish common-law robbery from larceny?

Property taken from the person or presence of victim, by force or threat of immediate force.

For common-law robbery, what does “presence” mean?

Property within the possessor’s easy physical control, even if not held in their hand.

A person leaves phone on table and walks away; thief uses force to take it. Common-law robbery?

No in model answer: phone not within possessor’s immediate control; larceny instead.

A person is seated beside phone on table; thief uses force to take it. Common-law robbery?

Yes: phone within victim’s presence and easy physical control.

Threat of violence next moment to obtain wallet: common-law robbery?

Yes: threat of immediate force.

Threat to harm victim’s family at some future date to obtain wallet: common-law robbery?

No in model answer: future rather than immediate force; consider extortion if property obtained.

Under Texas statute, what makes robbery aggravated?

Serious bodily injury, use/exhibition of deadly weapon, or injury/threat against elderly (65+) or disabled victim.

Under Texas statute, is threatening with a displayed gun enough for aggravated robbery without firing?

Yes: use or exhibition of a deadly weapon suffices.

Under Texas statute, what is ordinary robbery’s felony degree?

Second-degree felony; aggravated robbery is first-degree.

Under modern theft grading, which factors usually increase punishment?

Higher property value and prior theft offenses, according to the theft worksheet.

What distinguishes embezzlement from larceny?

Embezzlement starts with lawful possession followed by fraudulent conversion; larceny starts with trespassory taking.

Employee lawfully handles store jewelry but pockets a ring to keep. Crime?

Embezzlement under typical modern statutes; conversion may also be a civil tort.

Lawyer accidentally deposits client funds into wrong account and spends some unknowingly. Embezzlement?

No in the model answer: fraudulent intent is absent.

Trustee steals a coin from beneficiary’s shelf unrelated to trust assets. Embezzlement?

No in the model answer: trustee lacked initial lawful possession of that coin.