Question 1

Explain why the burden of going forward with the evidence may shift from the prosecution to the defense and may even shift back to the prosecution although the burden of proof never shifts from the prosecution.

Accepted Answer

The burden of going forward with the evi...

Question 2

Assume that state law does not require trial courts to offer a jury instruction in any particular format that describes the concept of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If the trial court failed to offer any instructions to the jury that it must find guilt, if at all, by the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt, and a conviction resulted, an appellate court should:

Accepted Answer

A)   reverse the judgment if the jury returned a guilty verdict.
B)   not reverse the judgment because it is the duty of the defendant to request an instruction.
C)   not automatically reverse the verdict.
D)   not review the verdict because the judge would have offered a jury instruction on proof beyond a reasonable doubt if it had been needed.

Question 3

If, in an assault case, the accused claims that he or she was not near the place where the alleged criminal act took place. Does the accused have the responsibility to prove that he or she was not at the scene? What degree of evidence is required?

Accepted Answer

In criminal law, the burden of proof typ...

Question 4

In the case of State v. Eichelberger, the defendant had been convicted of two counts of trafficking in stolen property in the second degree because it believed that Eichelberger sold property that he should have known had been stolen. Under the circumstances of this case, why did the reviewing court determine that a reasonable jury could have found that the evidence was sufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

Accepted Answer

The reviewing court determined that a re...

Question 5

If the trial judge fails to instruct the jury about an essential element of the crime and fails to tell the jury that it must find that element beyond a reasonable doubt, must the conviction be reversed? Explain.

Accepted Answer

Yes, the conviction must be reversed if ...

Question 6

In the case of Lindsey v. Commonwealth, the defendant was convicted of petty larceny in a Virginia criminal court. The prosecution benefited from an instruction to the jury that indicated that where a defendant concealed personal property while on the premises of a retail store was evidence of an intent to convert and defraud the owner of the merchandise. The defendant contended that this jury instruction placed the burden of proving lack of intent on the defendant that was contrary to constitutional interpretations of the burden of proof by the U.S. Supreme Court because it had the effect of reversing the burden of proof. The reviewing court held that:

Accepted Answer

A)   a presumption that has been recognized for decades that reverse the burden of proof as to one element of a criminal case does not violate due process or fundamental fairness.
B)   rebutting the government's proof in this case was a type of affirmative defense for which evidence the defendant must introduce if he wished to prevail and be acquitted.
C)   placing the burden of proof for the defendant to rebut the government's case was not a violation of due process.
D)   the jury instruction that was given was merely a permissible inference that the jury was free to ignore if it chose to do so and it did not constitute a reversal of the burden of proof.

Question 7

If "specific intent" is an element of a crime:

Accepted Answer

A)   jury instructions that have the effect of shifting the burden to the defense to produce evidence demonstrating lack of intent are improper.
B)   the burden can be shifted to the defense since this concept operates similarly to an affirmative defense.
C)   there is a rebuttable presumption that the defendant intended the consequences of the act that he or she set in motion.
D)   a defendant has the responsibility of proving lack of intent.

Question 8

After the trier of fact renders a guilty verdict, can the reviewing court set aside a conviction if it finds that no rational trier of fact could logically have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Explain your answer.

Accepted Answer

Yes, the reviewing court can set aside a...

Question 9

In some instances, the burden of proving affirmative defenses is placed on the defendant. In this situation, the degree of proof usually is:

Accepted Answer

A)   beyond a reasonable doubt.
B)   by clear and convincing evidence.
C)   by a preponderance of the evidence.
D)   by evidence that is uncontradicted.

Question 10

In the case of Martin v. Ohio, the defendant was tried in state court for aggravated murder. What was the decision of the United States Supreme Court concerning the Ohio practice of placing on the defendant the burden of proving that she was acting in self-defense when she allegedly committed the murder? Do other states follow the same rule regarding the burden of proof when self-defense is claimed by the defendant?

Accepted Answer

In the case of Martin v. Ohio, the Unite...

Question 11

In a homicide case, if the accused pleads self-defense:

Accepted Answer

A)   the prosecution has the burden initially of disproving self-defense.
B)   the prosecution must go forward with proof that the defendant did act in self-defense.
C)   the prosecution is relieved of proving that a person was killed because the defendant has effectively admitted the killing.
D)   the accused has the burden of proving that he or she was in great imminent peril and that he or she could not escape or retreat with safety without increasing that peril.

Question 12

What type of cases may use the legal standard of clear and convincing evidence and preponderance of the evidence?

Accepted Answer

In the legal system, different standards...

Question 13

Define burden of proof, burden of going forward, and burden of persuasion.

Accepted Answer

The burden of proof refers to the obliga...

Question 14

If specific intent is an element of a crime, is it error for the judge to instruct the jury that "it is reasonable to infer that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of an act knowingly done?" Explain.

Accepted Answer

Yes, it would be an error for the judge ...

Question 15

In a criminal case, the state does not normally actively prosecute a case unless:

Accepted Answer

A)   the prosecutor is absolutely certain of a conviction.
B)   there is at least a strong chance that all the elements of the crime alleged can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
C)   the court determines that the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is on the prosecution.
D)   the judge, in advance, indicates his or her belief that the defendant is guilty.

Question 16

Although the prosecution has the duty to prove all the elements of a charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the failure to clearly prove one element of a crime:

Accepted Answer

A)   may be excused as long as there is strong general evidence that the crime occurred and that the defendant was the one who committed it.
B)   means that the defendant should be acquitted of the crime accused due to the prosecution's failure to meet its burden of proof.
C)   allows the jury to convict for the crime charged but to give a reduced sentence.
D)   will still allow a conviction to stand if the defendant did not object to the prosecution's failure to prove the one missing element.

Question 17

The law regarding the alibi defense differs from state to state. If the defendant claims an alibi defense:

Accepted Answer

A)   he or she denies that he or she was at the scene of the crime.
B)   the rule in all states is that the defendant must prove the alibi defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
C)   a state law that requires the defendant to give notice to the prosecution that an alibi witness will testify is unconstitutional.
D)   the state has the burden of disproving the alibi defense by a preponderance of the evidence.

Question 18

In some jurisdictions, courts have held that the issue of alibi is an affirmative defense, and when asserted, the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence rests with the defendant. What is meant by an alibi defense? Why do some states require that the defense give notice in advance to the prosecution that alibi witnesses are to be used at the trial?

Accepted Answer

An alibi defense is a claim made by a de...

Question 19

If the defendant introduces evidence of insanity, must the prosecution prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt? Discuss the various rules.

Accepted Answer

The answer to this question depends on t...

Question 20

In the case of In re Winship, the United States Supreme Court decided that:

Accepted Answer

A)   juvenile courts could use whatever legal standard of proof the respective state law required because juvenile courts were not subject to federal constitutional standards.
B)   proof beyond a reasonable doubt had never been required by the Fourteenth Amendment for juvenile cases.
C)   juveniles who are tried in juvenile courts had to have their cases decided by proof beyond a reasonable doubt when the acts of which they stood accused would have been crimes if done by adults.
D)   when juveniles were charged with acts that would have been crimes if they had been done by adults, it was not required that they be adjudicated by the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt because a juvenile case is considered civil in nature.

Exam 2: Burden of Proof

Correct Answer
verified

What type of cases may use the legal standard of clear and convincing evidence and preponderance of the evidence?

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
In the legal system, different standards...
View Answer

If "specific intent" is an element of a crime:

Correct Answer
verified

If the trial judge fails to instruct the jury about an essential element of the crime and fails to tell the jury that it must find that element beyond a reasonable doubt, must the conviction be reversed? Explain.

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Yes, the conviction must be reversed if ...
View Answer

Define burden of proof, burden of going forward, and burden of persuasion.

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The burden of proof refers to the obliga...
View Answer

In some instances, the burden of proving affirmative defenses is placed on the defendant. In this situation, the degree of proof usually is:

Correct Answer
verified

If, in an assault case, the accused claims that he or she was not near the place where the alleged criminal act took place. Does the accused have the responsibility to prove that he or she was not at the scene? What degree of evidence is required?

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
In criminal law, the burden of proof typ...
View Answer

The law regarding the alibi defense differs from state to state. If the defendant claims an alibi defense:

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

If the defendant introduces evidence of insanity, must the prosecution prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt? Discuss the various rules.

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The answer to this question depends on t...
View Answer

In the case of In re Winship, the United States Supreme Court decided that:

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
In the case of Martin v. Ohio, the Unite...
View Answer

In a criminal case, the state does not normally actively prosecute a case unless:

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
An alibi defense is a claim made by a de...
View Answer

After the trier of fact renders a guilty verdict, can the reviewing court set aside a conviction if it finds that no rational trier of fact could logically have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Explain your answer.

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Yes, the reviewing court can set aside a...
View Answer

Explain why the burden of going forward with the evidence may shift from the prosecution to the defense and may even shift back to the prosecution although the burden of proof never shifts from the prosecution.

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The burden of going forward with the evi...
View Answer

Although the prosecution has the duty to prove all the elements of a charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the failure to clearly prove one element of a crime:

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The reviewing court determined that a re...
View Answer

In a homicide case, if the accused pleads self-defense:

Correct Answer
verified

If specific intent is an element of a crime, is it error for the judge to instruct the jury that "it is reasonable to infer that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of an act knowingly done?" Explain.

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Yes, it would be an error for the judge ...
View Answer

Exam 2: Burden of Proof

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

What type of cases may use the legal standard of clear and convincing evidence and preponderance of the evidence?

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIIn the legal system, different standards...View AnswerShow Answer

If "specific intent" is an element of a crime:

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

If the trial judge fails to instruct the jury about an essential element of the crime and fails to tell the jury that it must find that element beyond a reasonable doubt, must the conviction be reversed? Explain.

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIYes, the conviction must be reversed if ...View AnswerShow Answer

Define burden of proof, burden of going forward, and burden of persuasion.

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIThe burden of proof refers to the obliga...View AnswerShow Answer

In some instances, the burden of proving affirmative defenses is placed on the defendant. In this situation, the degree of proof usually is:

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

If, in an assault case, the accused claims that he or she was not near the place where the alleged criminal act took place. Does the accused have the responsibility to prove that he or she was not at the scene? What degree of evidence is required?

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIIn criminal law, the burden of proof typ...View AnswerShow Answer

The law regarding the alibi defense differs from state to state. If the defendant claims an alibi defense:

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

If the defendant introduces evidence of insanity, must the prosecution prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt? Discuss the various rules.

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIThe answer to this question depends on t...View AnswerShow Answer

In the case of In re Winship, the United States Supreme Court decided that:

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIIn the case of Martin v. Ohio, the Unite...View AnswerShow Answer

In a criminal case, the state does not normally actively prosecute a case unless:

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIAn alibi defense is a claim made by a de...View AnswerShow Answer

After the trier of fact renders a guilty verdict, can the reviewing court set aside a conviction if it finds that no rational trier of fact could logically have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Explain your answer.

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIYes, the reviewing court can set aside a...View AnswerShow Answer

Explain why the burden of going forward with the evidence may shift from the prosecution to the defense and may even shift back to the prosecution although the burden of proof never shifts from the prosecution.

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIThe burden of going forward with the evi...View AnswerShow Answer

Although the prosecution has the duty to prove all the elements of a charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the failure to clearly prove one element of a crime:

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIThe reviewing court determined that a re...View AnswerShow Answer

In a homicide case, if the accused pleads self-defense:

Correct AnswerverifiedShow Answer

If specific intent is an element of a crime, is it error for the judge to instruct the jury that "it is reasonable to infer that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of an act knowingly done?" Explain.

Correct AnswerAnswered by ExamLex AIYes, it would be an error for the judge ...View AnswerShow Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
In the legal system, different standards...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Yes, the conviction must be reversed if ...
View Answer

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The burden of proof refers to the obliga...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
In criminal law, the burden of proof typ...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The answer to this question depends on t...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
In the case of Martin v. Ohio, the Unite...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
An alibi defense is a claim made by a de...
View Answer

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Yes, the reviewing court can set aside a...
View Answer

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The burden of going forward with the evi...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
The reviewing court determined that a re...
View Answer

Correct Answer
verified

Correct Answer
Answered by ExamLex AI
Yes, it would be an error for the judge ...
View Answer