Criminal law worksheet with answers

In Dutch criminal law, "noodweer" (Article 41(1) Sr) is:

1. AA justification for necessary defence against an immediate unlawful attack
2. BA rule allowing police to stop and search people
3. CA form of preparation for committing a crime
4. DAn excuse based on a strong emotional disturbance caused by an unlawful attack

Burglary in English law (section 9 Theft Act 1968) requires that the defendant entered a building or part of a building:

1. ABy breaking a lock
2. BWhile armed
3. CAt night time
4. DAs a trespasser

In English law, theft is defined in section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 as:

1. ADishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive the other of it
2. BBorrowing property from another person without asking first
3. CUsing force to obtain property belonging to another person
4. DDishonestly taking property belonging to another without consent, with intention to use it and later return it

During a burglary, D has handed a knife to an accomplice. When someone arrives, D says "come on, let's go" and climbs out; the accomplice stabs the person. Following R v Becerra, D's withdrawal is:

1. AIrrelevant, because once an accessory has supplied a weapon, no later act of withdrawal can ever relieve them of liability
2. BEffective, because any words of withdrawal are always enough
3. CNot effective, because withdrawal must be timely and unequivocal and may need more than words once violence is imminent
4. DEffective, because D left before the crime was completed

Strict liability offences are offences where:

1. AThe defendant must confess
2. BLiability arises only if the defendant was negligent as to every element
3. COnly intentional acts count
4. DNo mens rea is required for at least one element of the actus reus

D drives on the pavement to escape a man who is threatening to kill him. The most suitable defence is:

1. AConsent
2. BLoss of control
3. CDiminished responsibility
4. DDuress of circumstances

In R v Cheshire, the court held that negligent medical treatment of a gunshot victim:

1. ADid not break the chain of causation unless it was so independent and potent that the original wound became insignificant
2. BBroke the chain of causation whenever it was negligent enough to be the immediate medical cause of death, even if the wound still operated
3. CAlways breaks the chain of causation
4. DMakes the doctors liable for murder

In R v Larsonneur (1933), a French woman was convicted of being an illegal alien in the UK after being brought there by police against her will. The case illustrates:

1. AA state of affairs offence where liability arose without a voluntary act
2. BThe requirement of a duty for omissions
3. CTransferred malice from the police to the defendant
4. DThe defence of duress of circumstances excusing an involuntary immigration offence