MBE

CRIMINAL LAW &

PROCEDURE WORKSHOP

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 1 3/18/2015 1:30:20 PM
MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 2 3/18/2015 1:30:20 PM
 Criminal Law & Procedure
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

1. A B C D

2. A B C D

3. A B C D

4. A B C D

5. A B C D

6. A B C D

7. A B C D

8. A B C D

9. A B C D

10. A B C D

11. A B C D

12. A B C D

13. A B C D

14. A B C D

15. A B C D

16. A B C D

17. A B C D

18. A B C D

19. A B C D

20. A B C D

21. A B C D

22. A B C D

23. A B C D

24. A B C D

25. A B C D

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 1 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 .................

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 2 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE WORKSHOP 3.

Question 1 Question 2

To punish a gambler who owed him money, During a heated argument, a man punched his
a bookie purchased from a demolitions expert female coworker in the stomach after learning
a small explosive device that he planned to that she had been awarded “Employee of the
place under the driver’s seat of the gambler’s Month.” Angered, the woman responded by
automobile. The demolitions expert assured stabbing the man with a letter opener, which
the bookie that the explosive would be strong severed his aorta and caused his death.
enough to cause severe damage to the legs and
ankles of anyone sitting in the front seat of the The police arrested the woman. After
car, but would under no circumstances be strong receiving her Miranda rights, she confessed to
enough to kill. The device would go off when killing her coworker, but stated that she had not
the ignition was turned on. On Sunday night, previously held any grudge against him. When
the bookie planted the device in the gambler’s asked why she stabbed him, she stated, “He
car. On Monday, the gambler was sick and did just made me so mad when he said that I was
not go to work. That afternoon, the gambler’s a terrible employee and that he deserved the
15-year-old son came home from school and reward instead of me, and I just lost it when he
saw his father’s car in the driveway. The son punched me.” The district attorney charged the
took an extra set of keys from the house to take woman with homicide.
the car for a joyride, even though the gambler
had forbidden his son to drive the car without If the jury believes the woman’s statement, of
permission. When the 15-year-old turned on the what crime is she most likely to be found guilty?
ignition, the explosive device went off and the
boy died instantly. (A) Murder.

If the bookie is charged with the murder of the (B) Voluntary manslaughter.
gambler’s son, what is the jury’s verdict likely to
be? (C) Involuntary manslaughter.

(A) Guilty, because the bookie’s act caused the (D) No homicide crime.
son’s death.

(B) Guilty, because he intended to cause serious

bodily harm to the gambler.

(C) Not guilty, because he did not intend to

cause the death of any person.

(D) Not guilty, because it was not foreseeable

that the son would attempt to drive the car.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 3 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 4. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE QUESTIONS

Question 3 Question 4

The defendant and an accomplice were A defendant is charged with kidnapping a

committing an armed robbery of a convenience woman and killing her in a sacrificial ritual.
store when the police arrived. A shootout Experts agree that the defendant suffers from
ensued, resulting in the death of someone on the schizophrenia.
scene. The defendant is arrested and charged
with felony murder in a jurisdiction that follows Under the M’Naghten rule, which of the
the agency theory of liability for felony murder. following, if true, would entitle the defendant to
an acquittal based on the insanity defense?
The defendant is most likely to be found
guilty if the victim was which of the following? (A) The defendant sincerely believed that kill-
ing the woman was necessary to save the
(A) The store clerk shot by the defendant’s world but knew that society would punish
accomplice after the clerk had pulled out a him for his actions.
gun from under the counter.
(B) The defendant was manic and unable to
(B) The store clerk shot by the police, who were control himself when he committed the
shooting at the defendant. crime.

(C) The defendant’s accomplice shot by the (C) At the time of the crime, the defendant
police during the shootout. did not understand that his actions were
actually occurring because he thought he
(D) A customer shot by the store clerk, who was was just watching them in a movie.
shooting at the defendant.
(D) The defendant suffered from a delusion that
the woman used telepathy to consent to the
ritual.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 4 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE WORKSHOP 5.

Question 5 Question 6

A father who was paralyzed in an accident A man asked a coworker who was a wine
and unable to work refused to accept finan- collector to lend him a bottle of expensive wine
cial support from relatives or the government to put in his liquor cabinet, because he was
to help him care for his family. When one of inviting his mother over for dinner and wanted
his children became seriously ill and needed to impress her. The coworker permitted the man
medical attention, the father refused to allow the to take a bottle of wine worth $700 to his apart-
child to receive medical care at the local public ment for the dinner as long as he returned it
health clinic because of his feelings regarding the next morning. As he had planned all along,
the acceptance of charity. The father thought the man instead invited his girlfriend over for a
that the child was starting to get better, but then romantic dinner, at which they drank the bottle
she took a turn for the worse and died from her of wine. The next day the man told his coworker
illness. that he had been mugged on his way home and
that the muggers made off with the wine. Suspi-
What crime has the father most likely cious, the coworker found the empty wine bottle
committed? in the man’s trash from his apartment.

(A) Murder. If the man is charged with theft in a common-

law jurisdiction, of which theft offense is he
(B) Voluntary manslaughter. most likely to be convicted?
(C) Involuntary manslaughter. (A) Larceny by trick.
(D) No crime. (B) Larceny.

(C) Embezzlement.

(D) No crime.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 5 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 6. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE QUESTIONS

Question 7 Question 8

A felon planned to break into the rental A shopper at a flea market noticed a vase
storage unit next to his that contained valuable and asked a nearby person how much it cost.
electronic equipment. He went to a hardware The person replied, “One hundred dollars.” The
store to purchase a crowbar. The proprietor sold shopper paid him the money and took the vase.
him the crowbar even though he told her that The person, who was not the owner of the vase
he needed it to break into someone’s storage but merely a bystander, absconded with the $100.
unit. After the purchase, the felon went to the
storage facility with his friend. The felon told What crime at common law has the bystander
the friend that he had lost the key to his storage committed with respect to the $100?
unit and did not have time to contact the facil-
ity’s manager, so they needed to break into the (A) Embezzlement.
unit to get his equipment. Because the felon had
a bad back, the friend pried open the door with (B) Larceny by trick.
the crowbar and carried the equipment out to
the car. A silent alarm was triggered and the (C) Obtaining property by false pretenses.
pair were apprehended shortly after leaving the
facility. (D) No crime.

Can the proprietor and the friend be convicted

as accomplices to larceny?

(A) Yes as to the proprietor, because she knew

that the felon was going to break into
someone’s storage unit with the crowbar.

(B) Yes as to the friend, because he carried out

the theft of the items from the storage unit.

(C) Yes as to both the proprietor and the friend.

(D) No as to both the proprietor and the friend.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 6 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE WORKSHOP 7.

Question 9 Question 10

A homeowner decided to destroy his home by A drug addict entered a pawnshop with a
fire in order to collect the insurance. A neigh- starter pistol that could not fire real bullets,
bor’s house was located a short distance from intending to rob it so he could buy drugs.
the homeowner’s home. The homeowner knew However, once inside the pawnshop, the addict
that there was a strong wind blowing towards was too afraid to do anything and turned to
the neighbor’s home; while he did not want to leave. He bumped into another customer who
burn the neighbor’s home, he nevertheless set was coming in as he was going out, and the
fire to his own home. The fire department was pistol fell from his coat pocket. The shopkeeper
unable to save the homeowner’s house. They saw it and realized what the addict had intended.
did manage to put out the fire moments before She chased after him and flagged down a patrol
it spread to the neighbor’s home, which suffered car, and he was arrested a block away.
damage from smoke and soot. The jurisdiction’s
arson statute covers burning one’s own dwelling The addict is charged with burglary, which
as well as the dwelling of another, but is other- is defined in this jurisdiction as “breaking and
wise unchanged from the common law. entering of any building for the purpose of
committing a felony.”
If the homeowner is charged with attempted
arson of the neighbor’s home, is he likely to be His best defense would be which of the
found guilty? following?

(A) No, because he did not intend to burn the (A) His pistol was inoperative.
neighbor’s house.
(B) The pawnshop was open for business.
(B) No, because the fire was put out before any
part of the neighbor’s home was burned. (C) He had abandoned his plan to commit the
robbery.
(C) Yes, because he intended to burn his own
home and took a substantial step toward (D) As a drug addict, he was incapable of
burning the neighbor’s house. forming the requisite intent.

(D) Yes, because he acted with malice and took

a substantial step toward burning the neigh-
bor’s house.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 7 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 8. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE QUESTIONS

Question 11 Question 12

A gang member determined that he needed Three men agreed to rob a restaurant in a
to avenge a recent shooting of his friend by nearby town and bought pistols, ski masks, and
killing a member of the rival gang responsible gloves for that purpose. Prior to entering the
for the shooting. He drank heavily to build up restaurant, the man who was to be the lookout
his courage and then went to the home of the had a change of heart and wanted to call off
rival with a loaded gun and knocked on the the robbery. The other two men refused so
door. When the rival opened the door, the gang the lookout threw down his gun and went to
member pointed the gun at the rival and pulled the nearby bus station to catch a bus back to
the trigger. However, due to being intoxicated, his home. The remaining two men went into
he had forgotten to release the safety, so the gun the restaurant and robbed it and its patrons. A
did not discharge. He was easily disarmed by patrol car happened by as they were leaving,
the rival and arrested by the police. At his trial, and one of the men seized one of the customers
he testified that he was so intoxicated that he as a hostage. In the exchange of gunfire with
did not remember anything that happened at the the police, a police officer and the hostage were
rival’s house. killed. Both men escaped initially, but one
of them was later captured and charged with
The crimes below are listed in descending robbery and murder. However, because of illegal
order of seriousness. police conduct in connection with his arrest and
subsequent confession, all evidence connecting
If the gang member’s testimony is believed, him with the charged crimes was suppressed and
what is the most serious crime of which the the charges dismissed.
defendant may be convicted?
If the lookout is also arrested and charged
(A) Attempted murder. with murder, which of the following is his stron-
gest defense?
(B) Attempted manslaughter.
(A) He did not have the requisite mental state
(C) Assault. to be convicted of murder.
(D) No crime. (B) He did not physically participate in the
events that led to the killings of the police
officer and the hostage.

(C) He had withdrawn from the plan before the

two others began the robbery that led to the
killings.

(D) He cannot be prosecuted for a crime as

to which the principals have not been
convicted.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 8 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE WORKSHOP 9.

Question 13 Question 14

An irate woman seeking vengeance against A police officer patrolling at 2 a.m. heard a
an appliance store owner for selling her a defec- gunshot and saw a figure leap over a hedge in
tive television set went to the store armed with front of a condominium. Although it was dark,
two pistols. Just as she was about to enter the the officer could see that he was carrying a
store, she spotted a young mother walking by briefcase in one hand and a gun in the other.
with a baby carriage. The woman pointed one of Just then, someone limped out of the building
the pistols at the mother and one at the carriage, and pointed at the figure, yelling, “He shot me!”
saying, “I hate the owner of this store! Take The officer then twice commanded the figure to
this gun, go into his store, and do the job or the stop and fired three warning shots in the air. The
kid gets it!” The mother began pleading for her person kept running, so the officer fired a fourth
baby’s life, but the woman cocked the pistol shot, bringing the person down. The person was
pointing at the carriage and began counting. The later identified as a robber.
distraught mother took the other pistol and “did
the job.” If the officer is charged with battery, what is
the likely verdict of the jury?
Criminal charges are filed against the mother.
At trial, she asserts duress as a defense but is (A) Not guilty, because he had a right to use
found guilty. deadly force as necessary to stop a fleeing
felon posing a threat of serious bodily harm
What is “the job” she did on the store owner to others.
likely to have been?
(B) Not guilty, because a police officer cannot
(A) “Pistol whipping” the owner. commit a crime while acting within the
scope of his duty.
(B) Robbing the owner at gunpoint.
(C) Guilty, because a police officer does not
(C) Fatally wounding the owner with the pistol. have the right to use deadly force to prevent
a getaway.
(D) Kidnapping the owner at gunpoint.
(D) Guilty, because he did not see the robber
steal anything.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 9 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 10. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE QUESTIONS

Question 15 Question 16

Suspecting that a husband had slain his wife, A driver was stopped by the police after
police detectives persuaded one of the husband’s running a red light. Her roommate was also
colleagues at work to remove a drinking glass in the car. Because the driver did not have a
from the husband’s office so that it could be used driver’s license, the officer lawfully placed her
for fingerprint comparisons with a knife found under arrest and put her in his squad car. At the
near the body. The fingerprints matched. The time of the arrest, the officer saw a shopping
prosecutor announced that he would present bag in the back seat containing clothes with
comparisons and evidence to the grand jury. The price tags on them. The officer asked the driver
husband’s lawyer immediately filed a motion to if she had made any other purchases that day,
suppress the evidence of the fingerprint compari- and she responded that there were additional
sons so as to bar its consideration by the grand purchases in the trunk. The officer then searched
jury, contending that the evidence was illegally the trunk of the car, where he found additional
acquired. clothes purchases along with a clear plastic bag
containing what appeared to be marijuana. Later
Should the motion be granted? testing confirmed that it was marijuana, which
the roommates had purchased that morning from
(A) Yes, because, if there was no probable a neighbor.
cause, the grand jury should not consider
the evidence. The two roommates were charged with
possession of marijuana. Prior to her trial, the
(B) Yes, because the employee was acting as driver’s attorney moved to suppress evidence of
a police agent and his seizure of the glass the marijuana because it was discovered in an
without a warrant was unconstitutional. illegal search, and the motion was granted.
(C) No, because motions based on the exclu- If the attorney for the other roommate who
sionary rule are premature in grand jury was the passenger in the car subsequently moves
proceedings. to suppress evidence of the marijuana at her
trial, should her motion be granted?
(D) No, because the glass was removed from
the husband’s possession by a private (A) Yes, because the marijuana was the fruit of
citizen and not a police officer. an illegal search.

(B) Yes, because the judge had suppressed this

evidence at the driver’s trial.

(C) No, because she has no standing to object

to an illegal search.

(D) No, if she admits that she owns the

marijuana.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 10 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE WORKSHOP 11.

Question 17 Question 18

A drug smuggler had just returned home after A man beat his live-in girlfriend and fled. The
smuggling in a large quantity of cocaine in the girlfriend called the police and told them about
false bottom of his suitcase. As he was about to the beating. She also told them that the man
leave his house again to deliver the cocaine to likely fled to his best friend’s house. The police
his contact in the city, a police officer arrived quickly obtained a valid arrest warrant for the
with a trained drug-sniffing dog and asked him man and went to the friend’s house a few hours
if he could come in and ask him some questions. after the beating. On arriving, the police noticed
The smuggler declined but the officer stepped that a car registered to the man was parked
into the doorway, and the dog immediately nearby. They knocked and the friend answered
caught the scent of the cocaine and pulled the the door. The friend told the police that the man
officer toward the suitcase in the hallway. Based was not there. The police pushed past the friend
on the dog’s clear indication that the suitcase and began searching for the man. They found
contained narcotics, the police officer opened the the man hiding in a closet and arrested him. On
suitcase and found the cocaine. The smuggler searching the man after his arrest, police found
was then arrested and the cocaine and suitcase cocaine in a small metal box in the man’s pants
seized. pocket.

At a pretrial hearing, should the judge grant The man was charged with assault and posses-
the smuggler’s motion to suppress evidence of sion of cocaine. In a pretrial motion, the man
the cocaine in the suitcase? moved to suppress the cocaine, claiming that it
was the fruit of an unconstitutional arrest.
(A) Yes, because a warrantless search and sei-
zure of items within the defendant’s home Should the court grant the motion?
is not permissible, absent exigent circum-
stances. (A) No, because the police found the cocaine
after executing a valid arrest warrant.
(B) Yes, because the search and seizure
required a warrant. (B) No, because the search of the friend’s house
was valid under the community caretaker
(C) No, because the cocaine was seized as a exception.
search incident to a lawful arrest.
(C) Yes, because the police entered the house
(D) No, because there is no reasonable expec- without a search warrant or consent.
tation of privacy in the smell of one’s
suitcase. (D) Yes, because the small metal box could not
have felt like a weapon or contraband.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 11 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 12. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE QUESTIONS

Question 19 Question 20

A police officer received an anonymous tip The sheriff’s department received an anony-
that the defendant was at a particular street mous tip that a farmer was growing marijuana
corner selling drugs. Based solely on the tip, on his rural property. Investigators flew low over
the officer went to the corner, saw the defendant the farmer’s property in a small plane belonging
talking with someone, and immediately stopped to the sheriff’s department and took aerial
and frisked the defendant. The officer found an photos of the property. Once developed, the
illegal gun as a result of the stop and frisk and photos indicated that the area in the center of the
arrested the defendant. Prior to trial, the defen- farmer’s fields contained marijuana plants. That
dant moves to suppress the gun. afternoon, four officers went to the perimeter of
the farmer’s property. Using wire cutters, they
Should the motion be granted? cut their way through the farmer’s barbed wire
fence and walked to the center of the field and
(A) No, because the anonymous tip gave the found the marijuana plants. The officers then
officer probable cause to stop and frisk the obtained a warrant to search the farmer’s house.
defendant. On arrival, they produced the search warrant
and searched the farmer’s house, finding large
(B) No, because the defendant would have quantities of marijuana packaged and ready for
been arrested after completing a drug sale, sale.
so it was inevitable that the gun would be
discovered. The marijuana was seized and the farmer was
charged with numerous drug offenses. Prior to
(C) Yes, because an anonymous tip, without trial, the farmer’s attorney moves to suppress
more, is insufficient to stop and frisk a evidence of the marijuana seized from the house.
suspect.
Should the marijuana seized from the farmer’s
(D) Yes, because Miranda warnings were not house be suppressed?
given.
(A) Yes, because it is the fruit of the poisonous
tree, since the officers did not have a war-
rant when they entered the farmer’s prop-
erty through the fence.

(B) Yes, because the police had no right to rely

on anonymous information to search the
farmer’s property.

(C) No, because the police had probable cause

to obtain a warrant.

(D) No, because the open fields doctrine

applies.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 12 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE WORKSHOP 13.

Question 21 Question 22

Several students at a public high school A police officer who stopped a driver for
told a teacher that a fellow student was selling speeding noticed that the driver resembled the
illegal drugs to other students at the school. The description of a hit-and-run driver who had
accused student was called into the principal’s struck and killed a nine-year-old boy two days
office and informed of the accusations. The before. The officer examined the driver’s car and
student denied everything, but the principal found recent dents. The driver was arrested for
grabbed the student’s purse, which was on top the hit-and-run offense and read his Miranda
of his desk, and opened it. He removed five rights. However, the officer failed to inform him
small transparent plastic bags, each of which that the child struck in the hit-and-run accident
contained a white powder, and immediately had subsequently died. On the way to the police
called the police. The police arrested the student station in the squad car, the driver blurted out,
and conducted tests confirming that the white “You got me. I was the hit-and-run driver. I just
powder was cocaine. hope the kid is okay.” The officer still failed to
inform him that the child had died. At the station
The student was charged with possession of house, the arresting officer said to the driver,
a controlled substance with intent to sell. At “Look, you’ve already confessed. How about
her trial, the state planned to introduce the bags writing it down?” The driver replied, “I don’t
and their contents into evidence. The student’s think I should write or sign anything without a
attorney moved to suppress the evidence. lawyer, but I’ll talk.” He again admitted that he
was the hit-and-run driver. The officer made a
How should the court rule? tape recording of his confession.
(A) Grant the motion, because there was ad- In addition to speeding, the driver has been
equate time to obtain a warrant. charged with leaving the scene of an accident
and involuntary manslaughter. At the driver’s
(B) Grant the motion, because the principal trial, the prosecution seeks to admit both the
lacked probable cause. first confession (in the squad car) and the second
confession (in the station house). The driver’s
(C) Deny the motion, because the principal had attorney moves to suppress both confessions.
a reasonable suspicion that the student was
selling drugs. How should the court rule on the motion?
(D) Deny the motion, because a principal, (A) Granted as to the first confession; denied as
acting in loco parentis, has the right to to the second.
search students whenever he chooses to do
so. (B) Granted as to the second confession; denied
as to the first.

(C) Granted for both confessions.

(D) Denied for both confessions.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 13 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 14. CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE QUESTIONS

Question 23 Question 24

A police officer outside a mall heard gunshots A suspect was arrested on a charge of bank
coming from the indoor dining area. He rushed robbery. After formal charges had been filed, the
into the dining area and saw a woman standing suspect was scheduled for a lineup identification
there with an assault rifle lying on the ground procedure. The suspect’s attorney was notified
beside her. Several patrons were scattered of the lineup and arrived at the station prior to
prostrate about the dining area, some obviously the scheduled lineup. He was directed to wait in
suffering from gunshot wounds. The officer said, the hallway outside the lineup room. When the
“What the hell happened here?” The woman suspect was escorted into the lineup room, the
replied in a dazed manner, “I just wiped out the officer acknowledged the attorney but did not
lunch crowd.” motion for him to follow them into the lineup
room. The attorney remained seated in the
The woman was subsequently charged with hallway. Inside the lineup room, the six members
several murders and attempted murders. At trial, of the lineup, including the suspect, stood on
testimony of the surviving customer was vague one side of the one-way mirror in full view of
and conflicting. The prosecution offers the testi- the witnesses gathered on the other side in the
mony of the police officer, who will relate what viewing area. The lineup members stepped
he observed, including the woman’s statement. forward one by one for a closer inspection. After
Counsel for the woman objects to admission of the first two lineup members had been presented,
any statements made by her to the police officer. an officer realized that the suspect’s attorney
was not present and immediately escorted him
How should the court rule? to the viewing area. The attorney arrived in
time to witness the presentation of the suspect
(A) For the state, because the woman was not and the remaining three members of the lineup.
in custody when she made the statement to Two witnesses then identified the suspect as the
the officer. robber.
(B) For the state, because the need for the infor- At trial, if the defense objects to the introduc-
mation is great, and there are guarantees tion of the lineup evidence, should the objection
of its reliability equivalent to recognized be granted?
exceptions to the hearsay rule.
(A) No, because the attorney’s absence from
(C) For the woman, because the officer did not the lineup procedure was the product of a
advise her of her constitutional rights before good faith mistake.
questioning her.
(B) No, because the attorney was present when
(D) For the woman, because the prejudicial the suspect was presented in the lineup for
effect of such evidence far outweighs its identification by the witnesses.
probative value.
(C) Yes, because the right to have counsel
present at a post-charge lineup includes the
right to have counsel present for the entire
lineup.

(D) Yes, unless the witnesses are unavailable at

trial.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 14 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
 CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE WORKSHOP 15.

Question 25

Two men were arrested while riding in a

stolen automobile. They were taken to the police
station, booked, and fingerprinted. They were
then taken to an interrogation room. After the
detective gave them their Miranda warnings, one
of the men said, “Forget it. As soon as you check
for outstanding warrants, you’ll find out that
I escaped from prison. Since I am going back
anyway, it’s a farce to deny that we stole that
car.” The other man said nothing, and the first
man proceeded to write and sign a full confes-
sion.

The man who remained silent pled not guilty

to the charge of grand theft auto. At his trial the
prosecutor seeks to introduce evidence to show
that he did not deny that he stole the automobile
when the other man told the police in front of
him that he was a party to the theft.

Should the court hold that this evidence is

proper?

(A) Yes, because silence in this situation is

indicative of guilt and is an implied admis-
sion.

(B) Yes, because the man who confessed had

voluntarily waived his right to remain
silent.

(C) No, because an accomplice’s evidence is

inherently unreliable and unduly prejudi-
cial.

(D) No, because under this circumstance, the

man who remained silent had no duty or
responsibility to deny the allegation.

STOP

MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 15 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM
MPQ 204 workshop criminal law and procedure O.indd 16 3/18/2015 1:30:21 PM