Chapter 8 Q&A
3. For a crime to be committed, the prosecutor must be able to prove a criminal intent and an overt act to carry out that intent. Jack and Mary agreed to rob a series of banks. Prior to beginning their bank robbery spree, they were arrested and charged with criminal conspiracy. What act did Jack and Mary do that justifies a finding that they committed the crime? Explain. As a general rule, crime involves combination of act and criminal intent. A crime is committed when it is acted upon with a criminal intent. An act of crime without a criminal intent is not a crime. Once an idea of a crime has been communicated and planned out it is considered a conspiracy. A conspiracy is a crime. The crime is justified due to the fact that both Jack and Mary planned the robbery. They both agreed to rob the bank. This is also known as a specific intent crime. When a crime has a specific intent the specific intent must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. In a burglary prosecution there must be proof of intent to commit burglary. In the case that they had been arrested, I would assume that there was evidence to prove the intent of their robbery spree.
4. When police entered her room without a warrant, Suzy swallowed two ‘uppers”. Portions of the capsules were recovered by the police with the use of the stomach police. What constitutional issues will be raised by her attorneys? Explain. The fourth amendment protects citizens from illegal search and seizure. Her attorney would probably argue that the police officer had violated her right that is protected by the fourth amendment. A search warrant is only granted with in an event where there is a probable cause. The warrants have to be granted by a judge. The exclusionary rule which was created by the Supreme Court rules that evidence which is “illegally” obtained by the police and all following information thereafter cannot be used to convict a person accused of a crime. In this particular case,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document