Preview Extract
Chapter 5: Inchoate Offenses 1. Under the common law, the inchoate offenses were felonies. Answer: False 2. Solicitation was not recognized as an offense at common law. Answer: False 3. Conspiracy is now defined by statute in both federal and state jurisdictions. Answer: True 4. Where a substantive offense itself is defined as including an attempt, the defendant should not be found guilty of an attempt to commit that offense. Answer: True 5. The crimes of attempt and conspiracy both merge into target offenses. Answer: False 6. A person who solicits another to commit a crime would not be found guilty of solicitation if a police officer intervened and prevented the completion of the solicited crime. Answer: False 7. Legally, solicitation is a more serious crime than attempt, regardless of the target crime. Answer: False 8. To be found guilty of conspiracy, one must join the conspiracy at its inception. Answer: False 9. Conspiracy is a separate and distinct crime that does not necessarily have to merge into the “target offense.” Answer: True 10. At common law, a husband and wife could not be found guilty of conspiring with one another. Answer: True 11. Most American jurisdictions define the inchoate offenses by statute, but their development has been primarily through the courts. Answer: True 12. To prevent a person from being punished simply based on intent, laws defining criminal attempt often require an overt act that constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of an offense. Answer: True 13. When it comes to proving criminal intent in a prosecution for an attempted crime, most courts require the prosecutor to prove at least the level of intent required for the target crime. Answer: True 14. Legally, there can be no attempt to commit a crime which, by definition, embraces an attempt. Answer: True 15. An attempt that completes a substantive crime merges into the target offense, making the actor guilty of the target crime but not also the attempt. Answer: True 16. If the crime solicited is committed or attempted by the solicitee, then the offense of solicitation ordinarily merges into the target crime. Answer: True 17. In a solicitation case, the prosecution must establish that the solicitor had the requisite intent for the crime solicited. Answer: True 18. Unlike criminal attempt, conspiracy does not merge into the target offense; it remains a separate prosecutable offense. Answer: True 19. Wharton’s Rule holds that two people cannot conspire to commit a crime such as adultery, incest, or bigamy because these offenses require only two participants. Answer: True 20. One cannot be guilty of an attempt to commit a crime that is factually impossible to commit. Answer: False 21. During the 1800s, inchoate offenses were recognized as ____ by the English common law. a. capital crimes b. misdemeanors c. felonies d. torts Answer: B 22. The most frequently charged inchoate offense is __________. a. conspiracy b. attempt c. solicitation d. none of these Answer: B 23. State penal codes often specifically provide for attempts to commit the most serious crimes such as murder. The remaining offenses are then covered by ___________. a. the common law b. the Model Penal Code c. judicial d. a general attempt statute Answer: D 24. Inchoate offenses are designed ___________. a. to define activity that is directed toward completion of a crime b. to enable law enforcement officers to terminate criminal conduct at an early stage c. to allow police to apprehend dangerous persons before they accomplish their criminal objectives d. All of these Answer: D 25. Most American jurisdictions now define the inchoate crimes by ___________. a. the common law b. executive order c. statute d. judicial decision Answer: C 26. A defendant cannot be found guilty of attempt if _______. a. it is legally impossible to commit the attempted offense b. he or she is convicted of conspiracy to commit the same crime c. the attempt is unsuccessful d. All of these Answer: A 27. Some jurisdictions have laws providing that it is a defense to the crime of ________ if the defendant voluntarily abandons its completion a. attempt b. perjury c. rape d. None of these Answer: A 28. Federal courts have recognized the requisite elements of attempt as (1) an intent to engage in criminal conduct, and (2) the performance of an act that constitutes a (an) ___________. a. conspiracy b. prohibited substantive crime in and of itself c. substantial step toward the completion of the substantive offense d. None of these Answer: C 29. Where a criminal offense is specifically defined as including a (an) _____, a defendant who is found guilty should be convicted of the substantive offense, and not of an attempt to commit that offense. a. conspiracy b. solicitation c. attempt d. None of these Answer: C 30. Which of the following substantive crimes would most likely embrace an attempt? a. murder b. rape c. uttering a forged instrument d. None of these Answer: C 31. Jones paid Smith $5,000 to kidnap Brown. En route to Brown’s home, Smith’s efforts were foiled by the police. Jones may be prosecuted for ___________. a. attempted kidnapping b. solicitation c. compounding a crime d. no offense because the kidnapping did not occur Answer: B 32. Commission of the crime of ___________ may be perpetrated through an intermediary. a. attempt b. adultery c. solicitation d. none of these Answer: C 33. In some states, a defense to a charge of ___________ is if the defendant can prove that he or she prevented completion of the target crime under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of his or her criminal purpose. a. perjury b. attempt c. subornation d. solicitation Answer: D 34. A person who paid another to commit kidnapping could still be found guilty of ________ if a police officer intervened and prevented the abduction. a. solicitation b. assault c. attempt d. injunction Answer: A 35. To be guilty of conspiracy, one must ___________. a. know and see one’s co-conspirators b. be a party to an explicit agreement to commit a crime c. be unsuccessful in committing the target crime d. None of these is correct. Answer: D 36. In general, the “actus reus” of the crime of conspiracy is ___________. a. the act of solicitation b. an attempt c. an unlawful agreement d. a substantial step to effectuate the conspiracy Answer: C 37. To obtain a conviction for conspiracy, the prosecution generally must prove that the defendant intended to further the unlawful object of the conspiracy, and such intent must exist in the minds of _______ of the parties to the conspiracy. a. All b. at least two c. at least one d. None of these Answer: B 38. While the crime of solicitation merely requires an enticement, the offense of __________ entails an agreement. a. misprision of felony b. compounding a crime c. aiding and abetting d. conspiracy Answer: D 39. In Callanan v. United States (1961), Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter observed that “the danger which a(n) ________ generates is not confined to the substantive offense which is the immediate aim of the enterprise.” a. conspiracy b. riot c. attempt d. unlawful assembly Answer: A 40. Conspiracy is now defined by statute in __________ jurisdictions. a. both federal and state b. most state c. federal but not most state d. neither federal nor state Answer: A 41. The range of criminal conspiracies includes ___________. a. deprivations of civil rights b. illicit drug trafficking c. violations of antitrust laws d. all of these Answer: D 42. The legal doctrine that holds that two people cannot conspire to commit a crime such as adultery, incest, or bigamy since these offenses require two participants is known as _______. a. the Pinkerton Rule b. the principle that conspiracy does not merge into the target offense c. Wharton’s Rule d. the concept that conspiracy is not applicable to commission of any offenses involving sexual conduct Answer: C 43. Under the ___________ Rule, a member of a conspiracy is liable for offenses committed by others in furtherance of the conspiracy. a. Wharton b. vicarious liability c. Pinkerton d. Anders Answer: C 44. In ____________ (1946), a man was charged with conspiring with his brother for to violate the federal tax laws, including some offenses allegedly committed by his brother during times that he was incarcerated. a. Pinkerton v. United States b. Callanan v. United States c. Leary v. United States d. Marchetti v. United States Answer: A 45. In some states, statutes specifically provide for a defense of withdrawal from and renunciation of ___________. a. a criminal solicitation b. a criminal attempt c. a conspiracy d. none of these Answer: C 46. An ____________ offense is one involving activity or steps directed toward the completion of a target crime. Answer: inchoate 47. Inchoate offenses include attempt, solicitation, and ____________. Answer: conspiracy 48. The most frequently charged of the inchoate crimes is ____________. Answer: attempt 49. Even where state statutes defining the inchoate offense of ___________ do not include the term “substantial” in defining the act requirement, courts usually impose that requirement. Answer: attempt 50. A criminal attempt includes a ____________ step toward the commission of a target crime. Answer: substantial 51. Courts differ on whether ___________ is more heinous than attempt. Answer: solicitation 52. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a criminal offense, usually a felony, is referred to as a _________. Answer: conspiracy 53. The essence of the offense of ____________ is the mutual agreement of at least two persons to commit a crime and such agreement is usually inferred from their acts and the surrounding circumstances. Answer: conspiracy 54. Under _________ Rule, two people cannot conspire to commit a crime such as incest or bigamy because these offenses require only two participants. Answer: Wharton’s 55. Courts regard each conspirator’s actions as the actions of the other conspirators. This is known as the _________ Rule. Answer: Pinkerton 56. Statutes generally provide that whoever commands, encourages, or requests another to commit an offense is guilty of ___________. Answer: solicitation 57. Numerous federal statutes define solicitation in various contexts. Irrespective of the statutory language courts often require the prosecution to establish the defendant’s ___________. Answer: specific intent 58. The actus reus of conspiracy is an unlawful ___________ between at least two persons to commit a crime. Answer: agreement 59. ____________ holds that two people cannot conspire to commit a crime such as adultery, incest, or bigamy because these offenses require at least two participants. Answer: Wharton’s Rule 60. In the absence of a requirement of an ___________ a conspiracy statute potentially infringes the First Amendment freedoms. Answer: overt act 61. In many jurisdictions it is a defense to a charge of committing an attempt if it would be __________ impossible to commit the target crime. Answer: legally 62. The ____________ Rule holds that conspirators are agents of one another bound by the acts of their coconspirators, so each conspirator is responsible for the acts of the others within the context of their common design. Answer: Pinkerton 63. The Model Penal Code provides that the accused’s complete and voluntary ________ of his criminal purpose is a defense to a charge of solicitation. Answer: renunciation; abandonment 64. In some states, statutes specifically provide for a defense of withdrawal from and renunciation of a(n) ___________. Answer: conspiracy 65. Statements made in furtherance of a conspiracy may be admitted into evidence, which is an exception to the rule that ordinarily excludes admission of __________ statements at trial. Answer: hearsay A state statute defines conspiracy as “an unlawful agreement to commit a crime.” Members of a local animal rights group now find themselves in court facing a charge of conspiracy to commit the offenses of criminal trespass and willful destruction of property. The state is not alleging that the target offenses took place, but merely a conspiracy. The evidence consists of statements made by members of the group via email, message boards and chat rooms regarding an upcoming protest at an animal research facility. 66. A key legal question in this case is whether: a. the conspiracy statute requires proof of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. b. the individuals named in the indictment actually made the alleged statements c. the offense of conspiracy merges into the target crimes identified in the indictment d. the members of the alleged conspiracy actually intended to commit the target crimes identified in the indictment Answer: A 67. The most likely constitutional defense in this case is one based on: a. the Fourth Amendment b. the Fifth Amendment c. the Ninth Amendment d. the First Amendment Answer: D After an extended period of kissing on the couch, J.J. forces his hand inside Mary’s blouse. Mary says, “No, stop,” but J.J. persists. He pins Mary to the couch, reaches under her skirt and pulls down her panties. At this point Mary’s roommate appears on the scene and J.J. stops, apologizes and leaves. Mary calls the police. 68. Based on these facts, J.J. appears to be guilty of: a. rape b. solicitation c. attempted rape d. no offense Answer: C 69. Had J.J. stopped, apologized and departed immediately after Mary said, “No, stop,” J.J. would have been guilty of: a. rape b. solicitation c. attempted rape d. no offense Answer: D Margo and Jeffrey, who are brother and sister, are charged with incest and conspiracy to commit incest. The state plans to call both their spouses as witnesses. Both spouses will testify regarding phone calls they overheard and emails they found indicating an agreement between Margo and Jeffrey to meet at a hotel for the purpose of committing incest. One of the spouses will also testify that he went to the hotel room where he found Margo and Jeffrey together, although they were merely talking at the time. 70. Assuming insufficient evidence to prosecute Margo and Jeffrey for incest, the legal barrier against prosecuting them for conspiracy to commit incest is: a. the Pinkerton Rule b. Wharton’s Rule c. Hale’s Rule d. the overbreadth doctrine Answer: B Jimmy Johansen is a “hit man” who has committed a series of contract killings at the behest of a local drug kingpin. Johansen has now been paid $50,000 to kill two police officers and has decided to subcontract one of the killings to Roger Reems, a man he recently met in a bar frequented by gangsters. Johansen has given Reems $10,000 and the necessary information about the intended victim. It turns out, however, that Reems is a police informant who immediately goes to police, turns over the money and informs them of the plan. 71. Based on these facts, Johansen is guilty of the offense of: a. attempted murder b. extortion c. solicitation d. bribery Answer: C 72. Reems is guilty of: a. conspiracy b. extortion c. attempted murder d. no offense Answer: D Donald Dexter, who is the mayor of Anytown, Your state has been charged with attempted embezzlement after it was alleged that he attempted to use city funds to pay for a lavish personal meal for himself and ten of his political supporters. The waiter who served the meal (who happened to be a friend of a woman running to replace Mayor Dexter) called the prosecutor’s office and informed them that when Mayor Dexter was presented with the $825 bill for the meal, he first tendered a procurement card issued by the city. However, before the waiter left the table, Dexter retrieved the procurement card and replaced it with his own credit card. Under the Your state statute, an attempt consists of: “(1) the intent to commit a particular crime; (2) an overt act toward the commission of that crime; and (3) the failure to complete the commission of that crime.” 72. The most likely legal question in this case is: a. whether offering and then retrieving the procurement card constitutes an overt act within the meaning of the state attempt statute b. whether the waiter had an improper motive in reporting the incident to the prosecutor’s office c. whether Dexter’s initial offering of the procurement card was inadvertent or manifested an intent to use city funds to pay for the meal d. whether the city’s laws prohibited the use of city funds to pay for benefits to the political supporters of city officials Answer: A 73. A key factual question in this case is: a. whether offering and then retrieving the procurement care constitutes an overt act within the meaning of the state attempt statute. b. whether the waiter had an improper motive in reporting the incident to the prosecutor’s office. c. whether Dexter’s initial offering of the procurement card was inadvertent or manifested an intent to use city funds to pay for the meal. d. whether the city’s laws prohibited the use of city funds to pay for benefits to the political supporters of city officials. Answer: C 74. Based on a similar but real case discussed in the textbook, a conviction in this case likely would be: a. not reviewed by a state appellate court. b. thrown out by a state appellate court. c. upheld by a state appellate court. d. reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Answer: B Test Bank for Criminal Law and Procedure John M. Scheb 9781285070117, 9781285690292, 9781285546131
