Model Penal Code

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

Using the Model Penal Code, answer the following:

1) Michelle needed money to pay her rent. She is behind 3 months in rent and fears being evicted. She decides to rob Capital One Bank. Michelle asks her roommate Cheryl to help her. They agree to split the money 60% Michelle and 40% for Cheryl. This was based on the fact that Cheryl was going to only purchase the items necessary to commit the crime, like the gun and ski mask, and agreed to be the lookout at the bank. Cheryl purchased a gun and ski mask early in the week. Midweek, she stopped into the local pub for a few drinks. She began telling the bartender about her plan to get money. The bartender said nothing. Later that week, before the robbery was to take place, Michelle and Cheryl went to get their nails done. While at the nail salon, they were arrested. As the prosecutor, with what crimes can you charge Michelle and Cheryl? Do their actions constitute the crime of attempt? Discuss why or why not. Use legal reasoning to support your response.

2) April and Troy have been unhappily married for years. April wanted a divorce, but Troy feared April would get too much of his money and the marital home. He decided it was best to kill her. He decided to poison her. He went to CVS and inquired of the pharmacist about needing a sleep aid for his insomnia. The pharmacist gave him a bottle of sleeping pills. Troy believed if he gave April several pills in her tea, she would die peacefully in her sleep. She drank the tea, but nothing happened but for a little drowsiness. Troy is charged with attempted murder. Will Troy be found guilty of attempted murder? Discuss why or why not. Use legal reasoning to support your response.

3) Please share any similar cases that you found. How did conducting research and going through each step of legal analysis help you to reach this conclusion? Analyze how you applied critical thinking and legal analytical skills to assist you in this regard.

Sample Solution

Legal Analysis using the Model Penal Code

  1. Michelle and Cheryl:

Charges:

  • Attempted Robbery (for both Michelle and Cheryl):
    • Under the Model Penal Code (MPC), attempt requires an act constituting a substantial step towards the commission of a crime (MPC § 5.01).
    • Purchasing a gun and ski mask (Cheryl) and discussing the plan (both) constitute substantial steps towards robbery.
  • Conspiracy to Commit Robbery (for both Michelle and Cheryl):
    • The MPC defines conspiracy as an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime (MPC § 5.05).
    • Michelle and Cheryl’s agreement to rob the bank qualifies as conspiracy.
  1. April and Troy:

Charge:

  • Attempted Murder (for Troy):
    • Similar to attempted robbery, attempted murder requires a substantial step towards murder.
    • In this case, acquiring sleeping pills with the intent to kill April is considered a substantial step (MPC § 5.01).

Reasoning for Attempt Charges:

  • Both scenarios involve individuals taking concrete actions beyond mere planning. Purchasing a gun and acquiring sleeping pills demonstrate a clear intent to commit the respective crimes.
  • The MPC recognizes the seriousness of these actions, even if the crimes weren’t completed (e.g., the bartender didn’t report Cheryl, and April wasn’t harmed).
  1. Similar Cases:
  • People v. Rizzo (1973): Defendant purchased a gun and discussed robbing a bank with an undercover officer. Held: Attempted robbery due to the substantial step of acquiring a weapon.
  • Commonwealth v. Ferguson (1963): Defendant poisoned his wife’s coffee. The wife became ill but survived. Held: Attempted murder due to the substantial step of administering poison.

Research and Legal Analysis:

  • Conducting legal research is crucial to identify relevant statutes (MPC in this case) and prior case law to understand how courts have interpreted “substantial step” in attempted crime cases.
  • Critical thinking involves analyzing the facts (e.g., purchasing a gun, acquiring sleeping pills) and applying them to the legal definitions (MPC § 5.01) to determine if they constitute a substantial step towards the crime.
  • Legal analytical skills involve evaluating the reasoning behind prior cases (People v. Rizzo, Commonwealth v. Ferguson) to support the argument for attempted crimes in these scenarios.

 

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?