Rutgers University Newark Mikes Crime Fact Pattern Analysis Paper Write a 2-3 full page fact pattern analysis where you provide a detailed analysis of what | Course Hero

Rutgers University Newark Mikes Crime Fact Pattern Analysis Paper Write a 2-3 full page fact pattern analysis where you provide a detailed analysis of what crimes each person may be charged with and which defenses might be available to each person. All information for the paper must be based on the Model Penal Code (MPC) that is attached. Again, it is very important to your overall grade on this assignment that you cite the specific sections of the MPC that support/ relate to each possible crime each person could be charged with. Remember that prosecutors typically charge as many crimes as they can in hopes that they will be able to prove some beyond a reasonable doubt. Also, again, please be sure to list possible defenses for each person/ each crime involved. SCENARIO: Mike and his young girlfriend, Tina, both out of work and penniless, thought that love was all that mattered and decided to get married. Although Mike had no money, he told Tina he was going to buy her an engagement ring. Tina inquired how he could afford it and he looked at her, winked, and said, “watch me”. The couple went to Malaguti’s Jewelry store and Tina picked out the ring of her dreams, which cost $5,000.00. Mike paid in cash and Tina could not understand how and asked where Mike got the money. Mike rushed Tina from the store with the ring. Mike told Tina not to worry about the money and besides, it only cost him $500.00 because the money was counterfeit and he had purchased it earlier from his friend Tony. The argument ended as he kissed her and slipped the ring onto her finger. They got married the next day at the Justice of the Peace. After the ceremony they decided to go to the local bar and drink to their wedded bliss. While there, several friends purchased multiple rounds of shots for them. Mike drank what Tina was unable to. When Mike ordered more, the bartender Tommy, refused to serve him further due to his condition. An argument ensued and Mike pulled out a gun from his pocket and fired a single shot which grazed Tommy’s arm, ricocheted and killed Maria, another bartender, who was standing behind Tommy. Mike grabbed Tina and started to leave. Tina, who had come to her sense about Mike by now, resisted, but Mike forced her out and pushed her into his car. Tina insisted that if he did not turn himself into the police, she would. Mike drove to his friend Tony’s apartment. Mike pushed Tina, now hysterical, into Tony’s apartment and told Tony what happened. Mike, now panicked, aimed the gun at Tina. Tony, a small time x-con did not want to be charged with murder, so he stepped in front on Mike to try to stop him. Before Mike could accomplish this however, Tina had backed away from Mike to an open window from which she fell to her death. Mike then hit Tony over the head with the gun and Tony fell to an unconscious state. Before leaving, Mike filled his pockets with Mike’s phony money to use for his getaway. Mike flagged a taxi down to take to his apartment. The taxi driver, Marie, realized the money was phony Mike had paid his fare with. In a fit of anger, and remembering where she dropped Mike off, Marie decided to get the money that was owed to her and went to confront Mike. After no one answered the door, Marie noticed a doggie door on the side door. She decided to slip through the dog door and tip toe into the apartment to get her money. In the dark, she tripped over a skate board, hit her head. In the morning the police were called to Mike’s apartment. Marie was taken to the hospital and eventually released. Date and Time: Thursday, July 23, 2020 11:29:00 PM CDT
Job Number: 121833663
Documents (100)
1. FOREWORD
Client/Matter: -None2. § 1.01. Title and Effective Date.
Client/Matter: -None3. § 1.02. Purposes; Principles of Construction.
Client/Matter: -None4. § 1.03. Territorial Applicability.
Client/Matter: -None5. § 1.04. Classes of Crimes; Violations.
Client/Matter: -None6. § 1.05. All Offenses Defined by Statute; Application of General Provisions of the Code.
Client/Matter: -None7. § 1.06. Time Limitations.
Client/Matter: -None8. § 1.07. Method of Prosecution When Conduct Constitutes More Than One Offense.
Client/Matter: -None9. § 1.08. When Prosecution Barred by Former Prosecution for the Same Offense.
Client/Matter: -None10. § 1.09. When Prosecution Barred by Former Prosecution for Different Offense.
Client/Matter: -None11. § 1.10. Former Prosecution in Another Jurisdiction: When a Bar.
Client/Matter: -None12. § 1.11. Former Prosecution Before Court Lacking Jurisdiction or When Fraudulently Procured by the
Defendant.
Client/Matter: -None13. § 1.12. Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt; Affirmative Defenses; Burden of Proving Fact When Not an
Element of an Offense; Presumptions.
Client/Matter: -None14. § 1.13. General Definitions.
Client/Matter: -None15. § 2.01. Requirement of Voluntary Act; Omission as Basis of Liability; Possession as an Act.
Client/Matter: -None16. § 2.02. General Requirements of Culpability.
Client/Matter: -None17. § 2.03. Causal Relationship Between Conduct and Result; Divergence Between Result Designed or
Contemplated and Actual Result or Between Probable and Actual Result.
Client/Matter: -None| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2020 LexisNexis
18. § 2.04. Ignorance or Mistake.
Client/Matter: -None19. § 2.05. When Culpability Requirements Are Inapplicable to Violations and to Offenses Defined by Other
Statutes; Effect of Absolute Liabili ty in Reducing Grade of Offense to Violation.
Client/Matter: -None20. § 2.06. Liability for Conduct of Another; Complicity.
Client/Matter: -None21. § 2.07. Liability of Corporations, Unincorporated Associations and Persons Acting, or Under a Duty to Act, in
Their Behalf.
Client/Matter: -None22. § 2.08. Intoxication.
Client/Matter: -None23. § 2.09. Duress.
Client/Matter: -None24. § 2.10. Military Orders.
Client/Matter: -None25. § 2.11. Consent.
Client/Matter: -None26. § 2.12. De Minimis Infractions.
Client/Matter: -None27. § 2.13. Entrapment.
Client/Matter: -None28. § 3.01. Justification an Affirmative Defense; Civil Remedies Unaffected.
Client/Matter: -None29. § 3.02. Justification Generally: Choice of Evils.
Client/Matter: -None30. § 3.03. Execution of Public Duty.
Client/Matter: -None31. § 3.04. Use of Force in Self-Protection.
Client/Matter: -None32. § 3.05. Use of Force for the Protection of Other Persons.
Client/Matter: -None33. § 3.06. Use of Force for Protection of Property.
Client/Matter: -None34. § 3.07. Use of Force in Law Enforcement.
Client/Matter: -None35. § 3.08. Use of Force by Persons with Special Responsibility for Care, Discipline or Safety of Others.
Client/Matter: -None36. § 3.09. Mistake of Law as to Unlawfulness of Force or Legality of Arrest; Reckless or Negligent Use of
Otherwise Justifiable Force; Reckle ss or Negligent Injury or Risk of Injury to Innocent Persons.
Client/Matter: -None37. § 3.10. Justification in Property Crimes.
Client/Matter: -None38. § 3.11. Definitions.
| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2020 LexisNexis
Client/Matter: -None39. § 4.01. Mental Disease or Defect Excluding Responsibility.
Client/Matter: -None40. § 4.02. Evidence of Mental Disease or Defect Admissible When Relevant to Element of the Offense[; Mental
Disease or Defect Impairing Capacity as Ground for Mitigation of Punishment in Capital Cases].
Client/Matter: -None41. § 4.03. Mental Disease or Defect Excluding Responsibility Is Affirmative Defense; Requirement of Notice;
Form of Verdict and Judgment When Finding of Irresponsibility Is Made.
Client/Matter: -None42. § 4.04. Mental Disease or Defect Excluding Fitness to Proceed.
Client/Matter: -None43. § 4.05. Psychiatric Examination of Defendant with Respect to Mental Disease or Defect.
Client/Matter: -None44. § 4.06. Determination of Fitness to Proceed; Effect of Finding of Unfitness; Proceedings if Fitness Is
Regained[; Post-Commitment Hearing].
Client/Matter: -None45. § 4.07. Determination of Irresponsibility on Basis of Report; Access to Defendant by Psychiatrist of His Own
Choice; Form of Expert Testim ony When Issue of Responsibility Is Tried.
Client/Matter: -None46. § 4.08. Legal Effect of Acquittal on the Ground of Mental Disease or Defect Excluding Responsibility;
Commitment; Release or Discharge.
Client/Matter: -None47. § 4.09. Statements for Purposes of Examination or Treatment Inadmissible Except on Issue of Mental
Condition.
Client/Matter: -None48. § 4.10. Immaturity Excluding Criminal Conviction; Transfer of Proceedings to Juvenile Court.
Client/Matter: -None49. § 5.01. Criminal Attempt.
Client/Matter: -None50. § 5.02. Criminal Solicitation.
Client/Matter: -None51. § 5.03. Criminal Conspiracy.
Client/Matter: -None52. § 5.04. Incapacity, Irresponsibility or Immunity of Party to Solicitation or Conspiracy.
Client/Matter: -None53. § 5.05. Grading of Criminal Attempt, Solicitation and Conspiracy; Mitigation in Cases of Lesser Danger;
Multiple Convictions Barred.
Client/Matter: -None54. § 5.06. Possessing Instruments of Crime; Weapons.
Client/Matter: -None55. § 5.07. Prohibited Offensive Weapons.
Client/Matter: -None56. § 6.01. Degrees of Felonies.
Client/Matter: -None57. § 6.02. Sentence in Accordance with Code; Authorized Dispositions.
| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2020 LexisNexis
Client/Matter: -None58. § 6.03. Fines.
Client/Matter: -None59. § 6.04. Penalties Against Corporations and Unincorporated Associations; Forfeiture of Corporate Charter or
Revocation of Certificate Autho rizing Foreign Corporation to Do Business in the State.
Client/Matter: -None60. § 6.05. Young Adult Offenders.
Client/Matter: -None61. § 6.06. Sentence of Imprisonment for Felony; Ordinary Terms.
Client/Matter: -None62. § 6.07. Sentence of Imprisonment for Felony; Extended Terms.
Client/Matter: -None63. § 6.08. Sentence of Imprisonment for Misdemeanors and Petty Misdemeanors; Ordinary Terms.
Client/Matter: -None64. § 6.09. Sentence of Imprisonment for Misdemeanors and Petty Misdemeanors; Extended Terms.
Client/Matter: -None65. § 6.10. First Release of All Offenders on Parole; Sentence of Imprisonment Includes Separate Parole Term;
Length of Parole Term; Length of Recommitment and Reparole After Revocation of Parole; Final
Unconditional Release.
Client/Matter: -None66. § 6.11. Place of Imprisonment.
Client/Matter: -None67. § 6.12. Reduction of Conviction by Court to Lesser Degree of Felony or to Misdemeanor.
Client/Matter: -None68. § 6.13. Civil Commitment in Lieu of Prosecution or of Sentence.
Client/Matter: -None69. § 7.01. Criteria for Withholding Sentence of Imprisonment and for Placing Defendant on Probation.
Client/Matter: -None70. § 7.02. Criteria for Imposing Fines.
Client/Matter: -None71. § 7.03. Criteria for Sentence of Extended Term of Imprisonment; Felonies.
Client/Matter: -None72. § 7.04. Criteria for Sentence of Extended Term of Imprisonment; Misdemeanors and Petty Misdemeanors.
Client/Matter: -None73. § 7.05. Former Conviction in Another Jurisdiction; Definition and Proof of Conviction; Sentence Taking into
Account Admitted Crimes Bars S ubsequent Conviction for Such Crimes.
Client/Matter: -None74. § 7.06. Multiple Sentences; Concurrent and Consecutive Terms.
Client/Matter: -None75. § 7.07. Procedure on Sentence; Presentence Investigation and Report; Remand for Psychiatric
Examination; Transmission of Records to Department of Correction.
Client/Matter: -None76. § 7.08. Commitment for Observation; Sentence of Imprisonment for Felony Deemed Tentative for Period of
One Year; Resentence on Petition of Commissioner of Correction.
Client/Matter: -None| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2020 LexisNexis
77. § 7.09. Credit for Time of Detention Prior to Sentence; Credit for Imprisonment Under Earlier Sentence for
Same Crime.
Client/Matter: -None78. § 210.0. Definitions.
Client/Matter: -None79. § 210.1. Criminal Homicide.
Client/Matter: -None80. § 210.2. Murder.
Client/Matter: -None81. § 210.3. Manslaughter.
Client/Matter: -None82. § 210.4. Negligent Homicide.
Client/Matter: -None83. § 210.5. Causing or Aiding Suicide.
Client/Matter: -None84. § 210.6. Sentence of Death for Murder; Further Proceedings to Determine Sentence.
Client/Matter: -None85. § 211.0. Definitions.
Client/Matter: -None86. § 211.1. Assault.
Client/Matter: -None87. § 211.2. Recklessly Endangering Another Person.
Client/Matter: -None88. § 211.3. Terroristic Threats.
Client/Matter: -None89. § 212.0. Definitions.
Client/Matter: -None90. § 212.1. Kidnapping.
Client/Matter: -None91. § 212.2. Felonious Restraint.
Client/Matter: -None92. § 212.3. False Imprisonment.
Client/Matter: -None93. § 212.4. Interference with Custody.
Client/Matter: -None94. § 212.5. Criminal Coercion.
Client/Matter: -None95. § 213.0. Definitions.
Client/Matter: -None96. § 213.1. Rape and Related Offenses.
Client/Matter: -None97. § 213.2. Deviate Sexual Intercourse by Force or Imposition.
Client/Matter: -None98. § 213.3. Corruption of Minors and Seduction.
| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2020 LexisNexis
Client/Matter: -None99. § 213.4. Sexual Assault.
Client/Matter: -None100. § 213.5. Indecent Exposure.
Client/Matter: -None-
| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2020 LexisNexis
Model Penal Code FOREWORD
Model Penal Code > FOREWORD
FOREWORD
The Model Penal Code of the American Law Institute, completed in 1962, played an important part in the
widespread revision and codification of the substantive criminal law of the United States that has been taking place
in the last twenty years. New codes were enacted in Illinois effective in 1962; Minnesota and New Mexico in 1963;
New York in 1967; Georgia in 1969; Kansas in 1970; Connecticut in 1971; Colorado and Oregon in 1972; Delaware,
Hawaii, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Utah in 1973; Montana, Ohio and Texas in 1974; Florida, Kentucky,
North Dakota and Virginia in 1975; Arkansas, Maine and Washington in 1976; South Dakota and Indiana in 1977;
Arizona and Iowa in 1978; Missouri, Nebraska and New Jersey in 1979; Alabama and Alaska in 1980; and
Wyoming in 1983. It is fair to say that these thirty-four enactments were all influenced in some part by the positions
taken in the Model Code, though the extent to which particular formulations or approaches of the Model were
adopted or adapted varied extensively from state to state. Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota, New Mexico and Virginia,
for example, were content with much less ambitious efforts in their revisions than Delaware, Hawaii, Kentucky, New
Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Utah. In each case, however, the legislative process made a major
effort to appraise the content of the penal law by a contemporary reasoned judgment–the prohibitions it lays down,
the excuses it admits, the sanctions it employs, and the range of the authority that it distributes and confers. To
stimulate that process and assist its execution was the purpose of the Institute in undertaking preparation of the
Model Code and of the Rockefeller Foundation in providing indispensable financial aid.
The process may not be over yet. Draft codes prepared in jurisdictions where enactment failed, notably California,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Vermont, may still be revived. There is a pending bill in West
Virginia and work is under way in Rhode Island and South Carolina. Congress, moreover, has been working more
than a decade on the drafting of an integrated code of our federal criminal law, building on the 1971 report of the
National Commission on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws. There may well be further motion on that project.
The original publication of the Model Code consisted only of the thirteen Tentative Drafts, containing different
portions of the text and accompanying Comments, that were considered by the Institute from 1953 to 1960; an
initial Final Draft, containing revised text on responsibility, sentencing and correction, considered in 1961; and the
Proposed Official Draft of the entire Code (without Comments) approved and promulgated in 1962. There was a
strong demand for this material and it was frequently reprinted. A further and final publication was originally
contemplated when the Comments, prepared annually in the course of the previous decade, had been suitably
updated. It was postponed, however, in favor of a more ambitious undertaking, a revision and expansion of the
commentaries to explore and reflect the far-reaching legislative and judicial response to the Code. That response
was plainly imminent by 1962, though its magnitude did not at once become apparent. By 1966, however, the
Revised Penal Law had been enacted in New York and twenty-two state projects elsewhere were beginning or
were under way.
A decade later, when twenty-four of the new codes had been enacted and legislation was in prospect in some other
states, the time for undertaking final publication was believed to be at hand. A grant from the Law Enforcement
Assistance Administration made the project possible and Professor R. Kent Greenawalt of Columbia University Law
School was appointed Chief Reporter.
Three volumes, containing Part II of the Model Code, Definition of Specific Crimes, with revised Comments drafted
by Professor Peter W. Low of the University of Virginia Law School as Reporter and Professor John Calvin Jeffries,
Jr., also of Virginia, as Associate Reporter, were published in 1980 and were very well received. Three more
volumes, containing Part I of the Code, General Provisions, with revised Comments drafted by Professor
Greenawalt, Professor Low and Professor Malvina Halberstam (Article 1), with the assistance of Professor Sanford
Page 2 of 2
Model Penal Code FOREWORD
Fox (Articles 6 and 7), are in the printer’s hands, with publication contemplated in the spring of 1985. These general
formulations present a much more extensive treatment of pervasive problems of the penal law than had been
developed heretofore in our legislative tradition or even in the European Codes. Their hospitable reception in much
of the legislative and judicial work of recent years represents an important achievement of the Model Code.
In the course of the revision of the commentaries, it became evident that a final, official publication of the complete
text of the Model Penal Code would be of value. This volume is designed to serve that purpose. The proposed
statutory formulations are accompanied by brief explanatory notes and references to the volume and page of the
revised Commentaries (or, with respect to Parts III and IV of the Code, the Tentative Drafts) where detailed
exposition will be found. The Explanatory Notes were prepared by Professor Greenawalt and his associates in the
course of their revision of the Comments. Unlike the statutory text, which had the Institute’s approval after a decade
of consideration by the Council and Annual Meetings of the members, the notes and commentaries are the work of
the Reporters.
May 30, 1984
HERBERT WECHSLER
Director
The American Law Institute
Model Penal Code
Copyright 2020, American Law Institute
End of Document
Model Penal Code § 1.01
Model Penal Code > PART I. GENERAL PROVISIONS > ARTICLE 1. PRELIMINARY
§ 1.01. Title and Effective Date.
(1)This Act is called the Penal and Correctional Code and may be cited as P.C.C. It shall become effective on -.
(2)Except as provided in Subsections (3) and (4) of this Section, the Code does not apply to offenses
committed prior to its effective date and prosecutions for such offenses shall be governed by the prior law,
which is continued in effect for that purpose, as if this Code were not in force. For the purposes of this Section,
an offense was committed prior to the effective date of the Code if any of the elements of the offense occurred
prior thereto.
(3)In any case pending on or after the effective date of the Code, involving an offense committed prior to such
date:
(a)procedural provisions of the Code shall govern, insofar as they are justly applicable and their
application does not introduce confusion or delay;
(b)provisions of the Code according a defense or mitigation shall apply, with the consent of the
defendant;
(c)the Court, with the consent of the defendant, may impose sentence under the provisions of the Code
applicable to the offense and the offender.
(4)Provisions of the Code governing the treatment and the release or discharge of prisoners, probationers and
parolees shall apply to persons under sentence for offenses committed prior to the effective date of the Code,
except that the minimum or maximum period of their detention or supervision shall in no case be increased.
Annotations
Commentary
Explanatory Note
Section 1.01 sets forth the title of the Code and calls for a legislative specification of its effective date. It also
addresses the problem, inevitably posed by the enactment of a new code, whether it has any application to
offenses committed or to cases pending prior to its effective date. Though such application is excluded generally, as
the ex post facto prohibition requires, room is perceived for the retroactive application of merely procedural
provisions and, with the consent of the defendant, of ameliorative or mitigative provisions. By the same token the
Code sentencing provisions may be applied with the consent of the defendant and the correctional provisions are
applied to persons under sentence so long as they do not increase the period of detention or supervision. Insofar as
the Code does not apply to offenses committed prior to its effective date, the prior law is continued in effect as if the
Code were not in force.
For detailed Comment, see MPC Part I Commentaries, vol. 1, at 2.
Page 2 of 2
Model Penal Code § 1.01
Model Penal Code
Copyright 2020, American Law Institute
End of Document
Model Penal Code § 1.02
Model Penal Code > PART I. GENERAL PROVISIONS > ARTICLE 1. PRELIMINARY
§ 1.02. Purposes; Principles of Construction.
(1)The general purposes of the provisions governing the definition of offenses are:
(a)to forbid and prevent conduct that unjustifiably and inexcusably inflicts or threatens substantial harm
to individual or public interests;
(b)to subject to public control persons whose conduct indicates that they are disposed to commit
crimes;
(c)to safeguard conduct that is without fault from condemnation as criminal;
(d)to give fair warning of the nature of the conduct declared to constitute an offense;
(e)to differentiate on reasonable grounds between serious and minor offenses.
(2)The general purposes of the provisions governing the sentencing and treatment of offenders are:
(a)to prevent the commission of offenses;
(b)to promote the correction and rehabilitation of offenders;
(c)to safeguard offenders against excessive, disproportionate or arbitrary punishment;
(d)to give fair warning of the nature of the sentences that may be imposed on conviction of an offense;
(e)to differentiate among offenders with a view to a just individualization in their treatment;
(f)to define, coordinate and harmonize the powers, duties and functions of the courts and of
administrative officers and agencies responsible for dealing with offenders;
(g)to advance the use of generally accepted scientific methods and knowledge in the sentencing and
treatment of offenders…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment