Law And Justice Final Exam

52 Questions | Total Attempts: 29

SettingsSettingsSettings
Please wait...
Justice Quizzes & Trivia

Questions and Answers
  • 1. 
    According to the “Durham Rule” approved by Federal appeals Judge David Baselon in 1954, the accused offender is not responsible for an offense if: 
    • A. 

      He did not know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he was aware of the nature and quality of the act, that he did not know that what we was doing was wrong.

    • B. 

      He did not have the knowledge or intention required by the definition of the offense due to some mental disease

    • C. 

      He suffers from a mental disease or mental defect that directly caused or produced the offense.

    • D. 

      He lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality or wrongness of his action or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.

  • 2. 
    Richard Bonnie describes three contemporary options to approaching the insanity defense. Which of the following approaches entails a “volitional prong”? 
    • A. 

      The Mens Rea Approach

    • B. 

      The Model Penal Code of the American Law Institute

    • C. 

      The revival of M’Naghten

    • D. 

      Some of the Above

    • E. 

      All of the Above

  • 3. 
    The McNaughtan Rule was first pronounced by:
    • A. 

      Fifteen judges summoned by the House of Lords

    • B. 

      Judge David Bazelon of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals

    • C. 

      C.R. Jefffrey in Criminal Responsibility and Mental Disease

    • D. 

      American Law Institute in the Model Penal Code

    • E. 

      None of the above

  • 4. 
    Which of the following is not one of the criticisms of plea bargaining outlined by Guidorizzi? 
    • A. 

      Plea bargaining coerces innocent defendants to plead guilty

    • B. 

      Plea bargaining undermines the integrity of the criminal justice system

    • C. 

      Plea bargaining allows criminals to evade proportionately severe punishments

    • D. 

      Plea bargaining undermines the deterrent effect of criminal sanctions

    • E. 

      Plea bargaining thwarts cooperation among members of the courtroom work group

  • 5. 
    Which of Leandro Andrade’s requests were not denied by the courts? 
    • A. 

      A petition for writ of habeus corpus to the Federal District Court

    • B. 

      A request for a certificate of appealability from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

    • C. 

      A motion to reduce his petty theft offenses to misdemeanors in the trial court

    • D. 

      A request for discretionary review to the California Supreme Court

  • 6. 
    • proportionate punishment, acceptable response to crime
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 7. 
    • punishments severe enough that costs outweigh benefits 
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 8. 
    • punishment separates individual from society to protect society 
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 9. 
    • attempt to change or approve inmate for his benefit or society’s
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 10. 
    State of Mind
    • A. 

      Mens rea

    • B. 

      Actus rea

  • 11. 
    Occurene of criminal offense
    • A. 

      Mens rea

    • B. 

      Actus rea

  • 12. 
    Criminal justice considers
    • A. 

      Mens rea

    • B. 

      Actus rea

  • 13. 
    Strict Sentencing considers
    • A. 

      Mens rea

    • B. 

      Actus rea

  • 14. 
    Defendant should be held responsible for his actions if he could not tell that they were wrong at the time he committed them 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 15. 
    Exculpating a defendant who can discuss right from wrong, but nevertheless is unable to stop himself from committing an act he knows to be wrong 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 16. 
    Policeman at the Elbow Test 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 17. 
    Moralistic component
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 18. 
    Reasonably short lived before it fell out of favor
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 19. 
    Most common sentencing departure
    • A. 

      Aggravating

    • B. 

      Mitigating

  • 20. 
    Require statement that “guidelines do not adequately represent severity of defendant’s defense or likelihood of recidivism
    • A. 

      Aggravating

    • B. 

      Mitigating

  • 21. 
    Jonathan Rowe, who believes that the insanity defense should be abolished, argues that the insanity defense is an important issue because
    • A. 

      It is used frequently.

    • B. 

      It is used in highly publicized cases involving serious crimes.

    • C. 

      It is used by wealthy defendants.

    • D. 

      None of the above

  • 22. 
    Richard Bonnie, who does not believe that the insanity defense should be abolished, argues that
    • A. 

      It works well.

    • B. 

      Some defendants should not be blamed or punished for their acts

    • C. 

      We should experiment with it further before it is discarded.

    • D. 

      All of the above.

  • 23. 
    Slow Plea
    • A. 

      Complete ban on plea bargaining

    • B. 

      Jury Waiver Bargaining

    • C. 

      Ban after indictment

    • D. 

      Plea Bargaining Cut-Off

    • E. 

      None of the above.

  • 24. 
    Adopted by Alaska in 1975
    • A. 

      Complete ban on plea bargaining

    • B. 

      Jury Waiver Bargaining

    • C. 

      Ban after indictment

    • D. 

      Plea Bargaining Cut-Off

    • E. 

      None of the above.

  • 25. 
    Adopted by Alaska in 1975
    • A. 

      Complete ban on plea bargaining

    • B. 

      Jury Waiver Bargaining

    • C. 

      Ban after indictment

    • D. 

      Plea Bargaining Cut-Off

    • E. 

      None of the above.

  • 26. 
    Prohibit case after plea has been in the system a certain amount of tiem 
    • A. 

      Complete ban on plea bargaining

    • B. 

      Jury Waiver Bargaining

    • C. 

      Ban after indictment

    • D. 

      Plea Bargaining Cut-Off

    • E. 

      None of the above.

  • 27. 
    Usse of plea bargains only before a grand jury returns a felony indictment
    • A. 

      Complete ban on plea bargaining

    • B. 

      Jury Waiver Bargaining

    • C. 

      Ban after indictment

    • D. 

      Plea Bargaining Cut-Off

    • E. 

      None of the above.

  • 28. 
    Gives defendants the option to either implicitly or explicitly bargain for sentence concessions in exchange for a jury waiver
    • A. 

      Complete ban on plea bargaining

    • B. 

      Jury Waiver Bargaining

    • C. 

      Ban after indictment

    • D. 

      Plea Bargaining Cut-Off

    • E. 

      None of the above.

  • 29. 
    Allows defendants the opportunity to appeal their conviction on the basis of an ineffective assistance of counsel
    • A. 

      Complete ban on plea bargaining

    • B. 

      Jury Waiver Bargaining

    • C. 

      Ban after indictment

    • D. 

      Plea Bargaining Cut-Off

    • E. 

      None of the above.

  • 30. 
    Supreme Court justification for plea bargaining 
    • A. 

      Encourages rehabilitation

    • B. 

      Presumption of equal bargaining power between parties

    • C. 

      Doesnt drive defendant to false self condemnation

  • 31. 
    Forces defendant to give up chances at trial 
    • A. 

      Integrity Arguement

    • B. 

      Defendants Benefit Unjustly Argument

    • C. 

      Coerceion of the Innocent Argument

    • D. 

      Pro-Defendant Argument

    • E. 

      Pro-Victim Argument

  • 32. 
     is due proccess irrelevant or does it affect the stregth of the sides during the bargain?
    • A. 

      Integrity Arguement

    • B. 

      Defendants Benefit Unjustly Argument

    • C. 

      Coerceion of the Innocent Argument

    • D. 

      Pro-Defendant Argument

    • E. 

      Pro-Victim Argument

  • 33. 
    Certainty of conviction is as much of a gamble for the prosecution as for the defense 
    • A. 

      Integrity Arguement

    • B. 

      Defendants Benefit Unjustly Argument

    • C. 

      Coerceion of the Innocent Argument

    • D. 

      Pro-Defendant Argument

    • E. 

      Pro-Victim Argument

  • 34. 
    Lighter sentences of plea bargaining weighed with unjust conviction
    • A. 

      Integrity Arguement

    • B. 

      Defendants Benefit Unjustly Argument

    • C. 

      Coerceion of the Innocent Argument

    • D. 

      Pro-Defendant Argument

    • E. 

      Pro-Victim Argument

  • 35. 
    Public loses faith in giving criminals bargains for commiting a serious crime
    • A. 

      Integrity Arguement

    • B. 

      Defendants Benefit Unjustly Argument

    • C. 

      Coerceion of the Innocent Argument

    • D. 

      Pro-Defendant Argument

    • E. 

      Pro-Victim Argument

  • 36. 
    More empirical determination than older moral component 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 37. 
    Policeman at the Elbow Test 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 38. 
    Critisized for broadness and emphasis on psychiatric testimony 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 39. 
    Attemmpt at consolidation 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 40. 
    Criminal responsibility if the act was the result of a mental disease and he lacks the substantial capacity to either appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform to legal requirements 
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 41. 
    Excludes those whose only manifestation of illness is killing victims
    • A. 

      Irresistible Impulse Test

    • B. 

      M’Naughten Test

    • C. 

      Durham Test

    • D. 

      ALI’s “Model Penal Code”

  • 42. 
    • Problematic when used to justify punishing individuals suffering with mental disorders because it is based on free will 
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 43. 
    • Involuntary confinement up to length of criminal sentences is allowed on basis of dangerousness and severe mental illness; problematic for people with mental disorders if they do not receive proper treatment during that time – no less dangerous when released
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 44. 
    Justice system is modeled on exacting 
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 45. 
    • Involuntary confinement up to length of criminal sentences is allowed on basis of dangerousness and severe mental illness; problematic for people with mental disorders if they do not receive proper treatment during that time – no less dangerous when released
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 46. 
    The contemporary justice system has a further aim of 
    • A. 

      Retribution

    • B. 

      Deterrence

    • C. 

      Incapacitation

    • D. 

      Rehabilitation

  • 47. 
    North Carolina has the doctrine of 
    • A. 

      Comparative Fault

    • B. 

      Contributory Negligence

    • C. 

      Pure Comparative

  • 48. 
    Plaintiff may recover the percentage of damages corresponding to defendant's percentage and defendant may recover from the plaintiff
    • A. 

      Pure Comparative

    • B. 

      50 Percent Rule

    • C. 

      51 Percent Rule

  • 49. 
    Plaintiff may recover if his fault is as great or less than the defendant
    • A. 

      Pure Comparative

    • B. 

      50 Percent Rule

    • C. 

      51 Percent Rule

  • 50. 
    Plaintiff may recover if his fault is less than the defendant
    • A. 

      Pure Comparative

    • B. 

      50 Percent Rule

    • C. 

      51 Percent Rule

  • 51. 
    Supreme Court Ruling of Tayler v. Walker 
    • A. 

      Questioned the forseeableness of the action

    • B. 

      Taylor was contributorily negligent

    • C. 

      Taylor acted reasonably under admittedly difficult circumstances

    • D. 

      Granted Motion for Judgment notwithstanding

  • 52. 
    Lower Court Ruling of Tayler v. Walker 
    • A. 

      Questioned the forseeableness of the action

    • B. 

      Taylor was contributorily negligent

    • C. 

      Taylor acted reasonably under admittedly difficult circumstances

    • D. 

      Granted Motion for Judgment notwithstanding