1. Define the doctrine of complicity. Doctrine of complicity refers to when someone is legally involved in a crime under a circumstance of a teamwork that turns malicious, that promote a criminal offense, based on the behavior of another.
2. What is the difference between an accomplice and an accessory? Accomplice differs from accessory in the accomplice is present at the actual crime. That accomplice liability is a very serious participation before and after during a crime. And accessory refers to the ability of the participation after a crime is committed.
3. Can someone who conspired to commit murder be convicted of murder? Why or why not? If someone who is conspired to committing a murder they can be convicted of murder because he or she can be guilty of conspiracy to this crime. All it takes to get charge with conspiracy of murder to get arrest of planning and perpetrating a murder.
4.
…show more content…
True or False? Accomplices are the same as conspirators. Accomplices and conspirators are totally different crimes.
5. What was the ruling of Bailey v. US? Mere presence rule is the rule that applies to Bailey v. US.
6. What exception to the Bailey ruling was established in the State v. Walden case? The exception that was established in the Bailey ruling is when the defendants have a legal duty to act, presence alone is enough o satisfies the actus reus requirements. Referring to the book “Criminal Law 11th Edition by Joel Samaha, in the chapter 7 pg.233 Participation before and during the commission of a crime”.
7. List the four typical elements of accessory-after-the-fact statutes (four points).
1) The actus reus element.
2) Mens Rea