Criminal Law, Section 1B December 10, 1999
Mr. Green 1:30 - 5:30 p.m.
1. This is an open book exam. You may consult any written materials that you have with you at the beginning of the exam.
2. The examination period will last four hours. It is recommended that you use at least the first half hour of the period to read the questions, determine exactly what they are asking, note issues that you wish to discuss, and plan your answer. Answers that are concise and well-organized will receive higher scores than those that are rambling and long-winded. Points will be deducted for answers containing incorrect or irrelevant statements.
3. You are encouraged to use subheadings when they help to clarify your analysis and organization.
4. If the same analysis would apply to the resolution of more than one issue on the exam, there is no need to repeat such analysis. Instead, you are welcome to incorporate it by reference.
5. You must answer all three questions on the exam. Please note that the questions are weighted unequally for grading purposes. To help you budget your time, I have indicated the approximate amount of time that each question should take to answer, assuming that you use the first half hour of the examination period as suggested.
6. You may write or type your answers to this examination. The answer to the first question should be written on a legal-sized pad with dark ink (if you write) or on double-spaced single sided paper (if you type). Your answer to the second and third questions should appear on the appropriate lined pages provided below, or on typed pages of approximately the same length. No credit will be given for answers exceeding the space limitations. The space given is only a maximum. You might well be able to write an excellent answer in substantially less space.
7. Write legibly. You will receive no credit for answers that cannot be read.
8. Write your confidential exam number on your copy of the exam and on the front of your legal pad (or typing paper). Do not write your name or otherwise identify yourself anywhere on either the exam or your answers.
9. If there are ambiguities in the facts, or additional facts you would need to resolve a particular issue, you should state any assumptions that you make, and how they affect your response. Be careful not to "assume away" key issues that need to be addressed.
10. At the end of the examination period, please return this copy of the examination (labeled as indicated above) along with your answers.
11. Good luck and Happy Holidays!
On November 28, 1999, all three were in New Orleans, where the World Trade Association ("WTA") was holding its 1999 annual meeting. Zubat was there as a delegate to the meeting. Bellsprout was there to participate in various activities opposing WTA policies. Charmeleon was there to lobby WTA delegates on behalf of his company.
Charmeleon was staying at the Cloyster Court Hotel in downtown New Orleans. Among the papers he was keeping in his hotel room was a confidential 100-page report prepared by a consulting firm outlining the detrimental impact that various proposed changes in international trade policy were likely to have on the environment. Bellsprout knew about this report, and believed that, if she could obtain a copy, and have excerpts of it published in the media, it would harm the cause of free trade and benefit the environmental movement.
At 11:00 a.m. on November 29, Bellsprout arrived at the lobby of the Cloyster Court with the intention of going to Charmeleon's room and stealing the report. She asked the concierge which room Charmeleon was staying in. After checking his computer, the concierge told Bellsprout that Charmeleon was staying in room 814. This was a mistake, however. In fact, Charmelon was staying in Room 815. Room 814 was registered to Eevee Zubat, the trade official from Bulbasaur.
Bellsprout then proceeded to the 8th floor of the hotel, where, at that hour, maids were cleaning the rooms. The door to room 814 (which, remember, Bellsprout believed was Charmeleon's) was open and a cleaning cart stood outside the door. Standing next to the cart was Jynx Pikachu, a hotel maid. Pikachu was wearing a button that said, "Proud to be a member of Service Employees International Union Local 100. WTA - Go Home!"
"Hey," Bellsprout said to Pikachu. "Are you anti-WTA? I'm with Sandslash, the radical environmental group. We're here in New Orleans to take action against all these terrible free trade policies."
"You bet I am," Pikachu said. "These WTA people make my blood boil. They want to export our jobs abroad, where wages are lower and labor standards are nonexistent."
"Well, listen," said Bellsprout, "the guy who's staying right here in Room 814 is a lobbyist for one of these giant multinational corporations, and he has some documents in his room that we at Sandslash would very much like to get our hands on."
"Really," said Pikachu. "Why don't we go inside Room 814 and you can tell me more about it."
At this point, Bellsprout and Pikachu entered Room 814, where they talked further and agreed that Pikachu would help Bellsprout steal the Vileplume document. They then searched the room for about ten minutes, but, naturally (given that they were actually in Zubat's room, rather than Charmeleon's) failed to find the document. However, while searching through Zubat's belongings, Bellsprout did come across a gun, which she nervously picked up and examined.
In the meantime, while Bellsprout was in Room 814 examining the gun, Brock Charmeleon was next door in Room 815 with his six-year old son, Krabby, whom he had brought with him to New Orleans. Truth be told, Krabby was a troublesome child. He was not interested in seeing the sights of New Orleans, going out to eat, or even playing in the park. He insisted on spending all of his time in the hotel room playing with colorful Japanese trading cards known as Pokémon, or "pocket monsters." In fact, he talked of nothing other than this subject. His life's ambition, it seemed, was to collect all 150 different such cards.
When Charmeleon finally insisted that Krabby leave the cards and go outside with him, Krabby clenched his fists, closed his eyes, and screamed at the top of his lungs, "You are a terrible father. I hate you." Charmeleon (who was a powerfully built man) was so angered by this that he picked Krabby up and threw him hard against the wall. As a result of his being thrown against the wall, Krabby suffered a massive concussion. Medical evidence later showed that, had other events not intervened, Krabby would have died as a result of the concussion within a few hours.
The wall against which Krabby was thrown was the wall that divided Room 814 from Room 815. When Krabby hit the wall in Room 815, Bellsprout (standing in Room 814 holding the gun) was startled. As a result of being startled, she dropped the gun, which discharged, causing a high caliber bullet to fly through the plaster wall separating the two rooms, and strike Krabby in the head. Krabby, who had been lying on the floor as a result of the concussion, was killed instantly.
A few minutes later, Zubat returned to Room 814 to find Pikachu searching through his things and Bellsprout holding his gun. Zubat pulled another gun out of his jacket (he was licensed to own and conceal both firearms), and without any warning, fired at Bellsprout. The shot missed her completely. At this point, police and hotel security arrived on the scene.
Please discuss all of the offenses that a Louisiana prosecutor should consider in deciding whether and how to charge Misty Bellsprout, Brock Charmeleon, Jynx Pikachu, and Eevee Zubat. Your discussion should be limited to the Louisiana statutes we have discussed in class, including the elements of each crime, any weaknesses in the State's case with respect to such crimes, and any defenses to such crimes. In analyzing the facts of the case, you may refer to any relevant authorities discussed in class (including the common law and Model Penal Code), provided that such authorities would be helpful in analyzing the problem under Louisiana law.
Angela's connection to Art House is that she owns the warehouse that Art House leases to conduct its business. She is aware that Art House deals in what she calls "kiddie-porn," but does not care so long as the rent is paid on time.
Byron is Art House's shipping clerk. He pulls individual titles from stock and assembles and boxes shipments. He is aware that Art House deals in sexually explicit material, but has never viewed any of its products or studied their packaging. "It's a job," he says, "Find me a better one and I'll take it."
Clem drives a delivery truck for Art House. He knows that Art House distributes videotapes, but had been under the impression that they were of an educational nature. "They're in big brown cartons when I handle them," he says. When he learns that he is charged with transporting sexually explicit videos of minors, he says "So what?"
The Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act reads, in relevant part, as follows:
18 U.S.C. § 2252 Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors
(a) Any person who-
(1) knowingly transports or ships in interstate or foreign commerce by any means including by computer or mails, any visual depiction, if --
(A) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor under the age of eighteen engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) such visual depiction is of such conduct; [or]
(2) knowingly receives, or distributes, any visual depiction that has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported in interstate commerce, or which contains materials which have been mailed or so shipped or transported, by any means including by computer, or knowingly reproduces any visual depiction for distribution in interstate or foreign commerce or through the mails, if --
(A) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) such visual depiction is of such conduct;
* * * *
shall be [imprisoned for not more than 15 years for a first offense, and for five to 30 years for any subsequent conviction].
Discuss the possible criminal liability of Angela, Byron, and Clem. Please do not discuss any issues concerning possible arguments under the First Amendment's protection of free speech.
Consider the following two hypotheticals:
(A) X is unwillingly driving a car along a narrow and precipitous mountain road which drops off sharply on both sides, under the command of Y, an armed escaping felon. The headlights pick out two drunken persons lying across the road in such a position as to make passage impossible without running them over. X is prevented from stopping by the threat of Y to shoot him dead if he declines to drive straight on.
(B) Same situation as above except that X is prevented from stopping by suddenly inoperative brakes. His alternatives are either to run down the drunks or to run off the road and down the mountainside.
Assume, in each case, that X drives straight on, running over the drunks and killing them.
Which Model Penal Code provisions, if any, would provide a defense to X in each case? Are there valid policy reasons why X should have a defense in one case, but not the other? Assume you are asked to draft a defense provision or provisions that would eliminate the discrepancy, if any, between the two outcomes. What should such a provision or provisions say and why? Discuss.