Withdrawing From Complicity Requires Affirmative Act

Description
Customer Reviews

State v. Formella; withrawal from consipiracy requires an affirmative act and communication to the other consipirators is helpful.

Your Price: $10.00

Quantity

Atkins v. Virginia

Execution of mentally retarded person is unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment. deterence; retribution.

The King v. Pear

If one rents property under false pretenses and fails to return it at the end of the lease time, and instead sells the property and keeps the money, he has committed a felony.

State v. Smith

Defendant may not be convicted rape if words and conduct of complainant justify reasonable belief that complainant consented. affirmative defense; general intent; mistake of fact; preponderance of the evidence; reasonable doubt; specific intent.

Attorney General for Jersey v. Holley

Provocation defense is akin to self defense; would a person having ordinary powers of self-control commit same crime as defendent given gravity of provocation? Evidence of the alcoholism or intoxication of defendant should not be considered.

Clark v. Arizona

Mott Rule; mental illness short of insanity does not bear on mens rea according to Arizona state Mott Rule; court will not allow evidence of a mental disorder short of insanity as bearing on a defendant's capacity to form specific intent.

General Deterrence and Sentencing

United States v. Milken, individual deterrence, general deterrence, punishment, retribution, and rehabilitation, appropriate criminal sentence.

United States v. McDermott

A conspiracy requires a unity of unlawful purpose between two or more individuals.

United States v. Armstrong

In selective-prosecution claims based on race, in order to obtain discovery, the claimant must produce preliminary evidence that similarly situated offenders of a different race could have been prosecuted but were not.

Perjury By Implication Not Allowed

Bronston v. United States; To support a perjury conviction, a witness must actually willfully state a material matter that he does not believe to be true.

Defense of Habitation

State v. Boyett; entry to home not required for defense of habitation, but habitation defense not applicable if victim was fleeing.

Substantial Factor Test

Valazquez v. State; but-for test and substantial factor test to determine liability as cause in fact; must also be the proximate cause or no liability.

Sentencing Guideline Range

United States v. Bernard Madoff; While the court must give the sentencing guideline range fair and respectful consideration, it is not bound by it and must make an individualized sentencing assessment.

Shopping Bag

Withdrawing From Complicity Requires Affirmative Act

Price

Select Usage (details) :

Related Cartoons