Question 1

You may intervene to protect another, but you are not required to intervene.

Accepted Answer

You have the moral and sometimes legal right to intervene to protect someone in danger, but generally, there is no legal obligation requiring you to do so unless you have a specific duty of care towards the person in danger (e.g., as a parent, caregiver, or certain professional roles).

Question 2

While an individual is not criminally responsible for self-abuse or for taking his or her own life, those who assist him or her are criminally liable.

Accepted Answer

Assisting someone in taking their own life or in self-harm is considered a criminal act in many jurisdictions, as it involves facilitating or encouraging actions that harm an individual. Laws vary by country and state, but assisting in suicide or self-harm is typically punishable under criminal law.

Question 3

A defendant's good motive in committing a mercy killing of a severely ill family member may be considered in determining guilt or innocence.

Accepted Answer

A defendant's motive, even if it is considered good or compassionate, does not determine guilt or innocence in a legal context. Guilt or innocence is determined by whether the defendant's actions meet the legal definition of the crime, not by the motive behind those actions. Mercy killing, regardless of motive, can still be considered a criminal act under the law.

Question 4

The recognition of otherwise criminal acts as justifiable constitutes a morally significant statement concerning our social values.

Accepted Answer

Recognizing certain criminal acts as justifiable reflects a societal consensus on what is considered morally acceptable or necessary under specific circumstances, thereby making a statement about the values and principles that the society upholds.

Question 5

An individual intervening under the alter ego rule may be an aggressor or may not possess the right to self-defense.

Accepted Answer

The alter ego rule in self-defense law posits that when an individual intervenes in defense of another, they inherit the rights and limitations of the person they are defending. If the person being defended was the aggressor or did not have the right to self-defense, the intervenor also does not have the right to claim self-defense under the alter ego principle.

Question 6

Cassie has decided to undergo rhinoplasty and signed medical releases to that effect. She has hopes of one day becoming a model and wants to do everything possible to give her the best chance at success. During her surgery, while she was under anesthesia, the doctor decides to fill a few wrinkles around her eyes with botox and give her lip injections. He decides to do this as a gift to her free of charge because he believes in her ability to be successful in the modeling business. Were the doctor's actions appropriate?
A) Yes, Cassie consented to the surgery and the additional procedures were minor in nature.
B) No, the scope of consent was limited to the planned rhinoplasty.
C) Yes, provided Cassie received a benefit from the additional procedures.
D) No, because this is not a socially beneficial activity.

Accepted Answer

The doctor's actions were not appropriate because Cassie's consent was specifically for the rhinoplasty, and any additional procedures would require separate consent. Performing procedures that were not agreed upon violates patient autonomy and informed consent principles.

Question 7

What party is generally is NOT entitled to self-defense?
A) the defendant
B) an accomplice
C) a peace officer
D) the aggressor

Accepted Answer

The aggressor in a conflict is generally not entitled to claim self-defense, as self-defense is typically reserved for those who are responding to, rather than initiating, an attack or threat.

Question 8

The early approach to the defense of others in the United States was the objective test.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The early approach to the defense of...

Question 9

What must the prosecution establish in a criminal trial in order to obtain a conviction?
A) a majority of the elements of the crime charged beyond a preponderance of the evidence
B) every element of the crime charged beyond guilt
C) every element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt
D) a majority of the elements of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt

Accepted Answer

In a criminal trial, the prosecution must establish every element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt to obtain a conviction. This is the highest standard of proof in the legal system, reflecting the principle that it's better for a guilty person to go free than for an innocent person to be wrongly convicted.

Question 10

The fact that an individual consents to be the victim of a crime constitutes a defense.

Accepted Answer

Consent by an individual to be the victim of a crime generally does not constitute a legal defense for the perpetrator, especially in cases of serious harm or public policy offenses.

Question 11

Justification defenses provide that acts that are ordinarily criminal are justified or carry no criminal liability under certain circumstances.

Accepted Answer

Justification defenses argue that certain actions, which would typically be considered criminal, are permissible under specific circumstances because they prevent a greater harm or promote a greater good, thus negating criminal liability.

Question 12

Virtually every jurisdiction provides that there is a duty or requirement to retreat before resorting to non-deadly force.

Accepted Answer

Most jurisdictions do not require a duty to retreat before using non-deadly force in self-defense; the duty to retreat usually applies to situations involving the potential use of deadly force.

Question 13

An individual who is mistaken concerning the necessity for self-defense may not rely on the defense.

Accepted Answer

An individual who mistakenly believes they are in imminent danger may still invoke self-defense if their belief was reasonable under the circumstances.

Question 14

Self-defense is recognized in how many states?
A) 50
B) 47
C) 16
D) 39

Accepted Answer

Self-defense is recognized in all 50 states in the United States, although the specifics of the law can vary from state to state.

Question 15

In order to use the necessity defense, the defendant must not have been substantially at fault in creating the emergency.

Accepted Answer

The necessity defense requires that the defendant was not significantly responsible for creating the situation that led to the emergency, indicating that their actions were a response to circumstances beyond their control.

Question 16

Timothy is the defendant in a criminal trial. It is the first day of the trial and the jury has just been chosen. His attorney, fresh out of law school, files a motion for judgment of acquittal. Has this motion been properly filed?
A) Yes, the defendant is entitled to file this motion at any time prior to submitting the case to the jury.
B) No, the defendant must wait until the close of the prosecution's case or prior to submitting the case to the jury.
C) Yes, the motion is to be filed before the prosecution presents its case in chief.
D) No, a motion for acquittal is not appropriate until the sentencing phase of the criminal trial.

Accepted Answer

A motion for judgment of acquittal is typically filed after the prosecution has presented its case but before the case is submitted to the jury, allowing the defense to argue that the prosecution has not met its burden of proof.

Question 17

States typically limit deadly force to defend the home to those situations where deadly force is reasonably believed to be required to prevent the entry of an intruder who is reasonably believed to intend to commit a felony within the dwelling.

Accepted Answer

This principle is generally known as the "Castle Doctrine," which allows individuals to use deadly force to defend their home (or "castle") without the duty to retreat, under the condition that the force is used against someone unlawfully entering the dwelling and there is a reasonable belief that the intruder intends to commit a felony.

Question 18

The law does not provide a defense to individuals executing public duties.

Accepted Answer

The law often provides defenses for individuals executing public duties, such as qualified immunity for police officers, which protects them from lawsuits for actions performed within the scope of their duties, unless they violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.

Question 19

Today, all 50 states recognize the right to forcibly resist an unlawful arrest.

Accepted Answer

Many states have moved away from recognizing the right to forcibly resist an unlawful arrest, instead favoring compliance and addressing grievances through the legal system.

Question 20

Necessity is based on the assumption that had the legislature been confronted with the choice, legislators presumably would have safeguarded human life over the crime committed.

Accepted Answer

The principle of necessity operates on the assumption that in extreme situations where a choice must be made between violating a legal norm and preventing a greater harm, the law assumes that the legislature would prioritize the protection of human life or significant interests over strict adherence to the letter of the law. This principle is often invoked in emergency situations where adherence to the law would result in a greater harm than the violation of the law itself.

Quiz 8: Justifications