1.Easy
In English law, "voluntary manslaughter" refers to:
- AA killing with the mens rea for murder where a partial defence applies
- BA killing caused by gross negligence at work
- CA killing caused by an unlawful and dangerous act, without intent to kill
- DA killing that the victim consented to in advance
2.Easy
Which two elements usually make up a criminal offence?
- AMotive and opportunity
- BDuty and breach
- COffer and acceptance
- DActus reus and mens rea
3.Easy
Which Act created the offences of fraud by false representation, failing to disclose information and abuse of position?
- AThe Theft Act 1978
- BThe Fraud Act 2006
- CThe Serious Crime Act 2007
- DThe Criminal Justice Act 1988
4.Medium
D takes V's bag and is seen; a few seconds later D ties V up to escape. Following R v Hale, D is guilty of robbery because:
- AThe bag was later recovered by the police
- BAny force used on the victim within an hour of the theft automatically turns it into robbery
- CAppropriation is a continuing act, so the force was used at the time of the theft
- DTying up a victim is robbery even without theft
5.Medium
Causation in criminal law requires that the defendant's act was:
- AIntended to cause the result in every case
- BMorally wrong
- CThe only cause of the result
- DA factual and legal cause of the result
6.Medium
D throws a glass of beer over V intending only to wet her; the glass slips and cuts V. Following R v Savage, D's liability under section 47 OAPA requires:
- AIntention to cause actual bodily harm
- BForesight that at least some actual bodily harm would result from the assault
- COnly the mens rea of assault or battery, with no foresight of harm needed
- DForesight that grievous bodily harm would be caused
7.Hard
In R v Walkington (1979), D went behind a shop counter and opened a till. This was burglary because:
- AD was carrying a weapon at the time
- BEntering a part of a building as a trespasser is enough
- CThe till contained money at the time
- DShops are treated as dwellings in law
8.Hard
Why is the principle of "lex certa" important in criminal law?
- ACriminal laws must be clear enough for people to foresee what is punishable
- BJudges must be certain before sentencing
- COnly certain crimes can be prosecuted
- DLaws must be certain to be enforced, so the police have no discretion in applying them
Answer key
- 1. A · A killing with the mens rea for murder where a partial defence applies
- 2. D · Actus reus and mens rea
- 3. B · The Fraud Act 2006
- 4. C · Appropriation is a continuing act, so the force was used at the time of the theft
- 5. D · A factual and legal cause of the result
- 6. C · Only the mens rea of assault or battery, with no foresight of harm needed
- 7. B · Entering a part of a building as a trespasser is enough
- 8. A · Criminal laws must be clear enough for people to foresee what is punishable
Full step-by-step solutions: practise this topic on examproblems.com.