The definition of “purpose” under the Model Penal Code requires a conscious desire that results and circumstances occur, and knowledge that the required conduct has occurred.

The dock area around Port Nasty is a rough part of town.  The taverns at the docks are considered pretty dangerous places that cater to ruffians.  Accordingly, locals who are not involved in waterfront activities pretty much avoid these bars.  But, one night during a “beer bust,” a local fraternity visited The Anchor Inn, one of the waterfront taverns.  Karl Heinz, a German seaman, was sitting at the bar watching an international soccer game.  He ordered a Heineken.  Billy Thompson, one of the fraternity guys, heard Heinz’s German accent when ordering the German beer.  He then began making insulting comments about foreigners, paying particular attention to making derogatory comments about Germans.  Upon receiving no reaction from Heinz (who was fluent in English), Thompson sat down at the bar right next to Heinz and said, “You have a lot of nerve, coming over here and drinking your foreign beer in an All-American bar.”  At that, Heinz threw a punch at Thompson’s jaw that knocked Thompson clear to the floor.  Heinz then turned around, ordered another Heineken, and resumed watching the soccer game on the television.  Thompson then reached into his pocket, pulled-out and opened a pocket knife, and charged at Heinz.  The bartender, seeing Thompson’s charging at Heinz, yelled, “Look out!”  Heinz tried to dodge, but he was cut on the forearm by Thompson’s knife.  Heinz immediately drew a small caliber gun and shot Thompson, killing him.  If Heinz is tried for murder, which of the following facts would be the least helpful to his defense?

Dr. Connelly, a physician, had sexual intercourse with one of his female patients while in his medical office.  At the time, the patient was legally married to another man. If the patient’s husband found out that Dr. Connelly had sexual intercourse with his wife, got his gun, brought it to Dr. Connelly’s office, and fired upon the doctor at point-blank range thereby killing Dr. Connelly, his best chance at a total acquittal on all potential homicide charges would be:

Louis was pulled over by Officer Smith for failing to signal when changing lanes.  Because this is such a minor offense, Louis assumed he was pulled over because he had a bumper sticker on his car that read “KAP:– Kill All Police.” KAP was a radical organization dedicated to the eradication of police forces everywhere.  When an additional police squad car pulled up, Louis was convinced it was a setup.  Although unarmed, he swung his fist at Officer Smith, striking the officer in the jaw.  Another officer, Officer Jones, saw this, and immediately drew his pistol and shot Louis in the stomach.  Louis then seized Officer Smith’s gun and shot at Officer Jones.  Louis missed, however, and killed an innocent bystander. Louis committed either a battery or aggravated battery against Officer Smith, depending on the grading of the offense in the jurisdiction.

Marilyn left Rumors Bar after having consumed five double Kamikazes in less than one hour.  While she was walking to the Metro, she bumped into Jinny, a homeless woman on the street.  Jinny swore at Marilyn and took a swing at her.  Marilyn responded by kicking Jinny in the face, and left the scene.  Unbeknownst to Marilyn, the five-inch spike on her high-heeled shoes went right into Jinny’s eye, causing massive bleeding.  Jinny died within an hour of the incident on the street from loss of blood.  An eyewitness identified Marilyn and she was arrested. If Marilyn were charged with involuntary manslaughter, her best chance for acquittal would be:

The phrase “willful, deliberate, and premeditated” in a first-degree murder statute necessarily means that the defendant must have carefully and thoughtfully formed a specific intent to kill. 

Allison was a mentally incompetent patient who was a ward of the state at the State Psychiatric Facility.  While there, Allison fell and sustained injuries that required her be transferred from the state facility to the Carter Convalescent Center (“CCC”), a private rehabilitation center.  Allison received extensive therapy for the back and leg injuries suffered during the fall at the state mental hospital.  When Allison’s rehabilitation was nearly complete, she became entitled to compensation for the injuries she had sustained while in state custody.  The state had been applying these payments to Allison’s bill at CCC.  Around the same time, Dana—a distant relative of Allison’s—was appointed to be Allison’s guardian and conservator.  Dana sought to remove Allison from CCC, even though Allison had never voiced any desire to leave.  Carter, the director of CCC, was aware that if Allison was removed from the facility, the state payments would no longer be able to be directly applied to Allison’s rehabilitation bill at CCC.  Carter consulted CCC’s attorney who erroneously advised Carter that case law had established his right to keep Allison at CCC until the bill was paid.  Therefore, when Dana tried to remove Allison from CCC, Carter refused.  If Carter is arrested and tried for the false imprisonment of Allison, should he be convicted?

Both at common law and today under the modern law of most U.S. jurisdictions, there is a rebuttable presumption that a child under the age of seven is not capable of forming criminal intent, and therefore cannot be convicted of a crime.

Johnny lived with his wife and three kids.  He had an erratic temper and sometimes beat his wife and children.  Lately, he had been having problems at work and had taken to stopping at the neighborhood pub before coming home.  On many of these nights, Johnny had attacked his family members while in a drunken state.  Three days after a particularly savage beating of his 17-year-old son, Garry, Johnny came home late from work in another drunken state.  Johnny’s wife was not home, and Garry was taking care of his younger siblings.  Johnny asked where his dinner was, knowing that his wife usually left him a plate of good if he missed the family meal.  Garry told his father than he had given the good to the family dog.  Angered by his son’s statement, Johnny said, “I’ll have to teach you to have some respect for your father,” but feeling a little unsteady, he added, “after a little nap.”  Johnny then collapsed on the couch.  Garry knew that there would be trouble when his father came to, so he took the children to a neighbor’s house and asked the neighbor to mind them for a while.  Garry then returned home and looked for his father’s shotgun, but could not find it.  After thinking for a while, he got a large knife from the kitchen drawer and waited near the couch for his father to awaken.  When Johnny awoke to find his son holding a knife, he said in a worried voice, “Garry, my son, what are you doing?”  Garry said, “You won’t hurt us anymore.”  And then he tried to jab the knife into his father’s chest.   Assume, for the purposes of this question only, that Johnny managed to wrestle the knife away from his son and then stabbed Garry with it during the struggle.  If Garry dies from the stab wound, the most correct outcome of Johnny’s trial for Garry’s death is which of the following?

NEW FACT PATTERN (Next 3 questions)Fred and his wife, Louise, are dining at the celebrated Italian restaurant, The Italian Scallion. Fred and Louise drink several bottles of wine. A singer, Luigi Clamsauce, comes to the table to serenade them.  Fred, in his drunken state, mistakes Luigi’s expansive arm movements for threats; as a result, Fred slugs Luigi and breaks his jaw.  In his drunken condition, Fred’s belief of imminent harm may have seemed reasonable, but if he had been sober, it would have been patently absurd.  Due to his intoxication, Fred should be acquitted of assault.