(1) (a) In the 2008 case Martin v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia indicated that public drunkenness “is defined as” what?; (b) The defendant in this case claimed that he could not have been found guilty of this offense because he was on private property that no rational jury could have found to be a public place. The Court however, pointed out that “a public place includes” what?
(2) (a) In the 2012 case Smoot v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia noted that the offense of keeping a place of prostitution has four elements. What are these four elements?; (b) The Court also noted that “the standard for weighing non-constitutional error in criminal cases is” what?; (c) As indicated by the Court, “when a conviction is predicated solely upon circumstantial evidence,” the law requires what?
(3) (a) In the 2012 case Cooper v. State, what did the Court of Appeals of Georgia indicate regarding whether a “bright line rule exists regarding the amount or type of evidence sufficient to support a conviction for possession with intent to distribute”?; (b) The Court stated that “in the absence of expert testimony concerning the amount of contraband associated with distribution, intent to sell may be proven” by what means?; (c) According to the Court, “OCGA § 16-2-6 provides that a jury may find criminal intention upon consideration of” what?
(4) (a) In the 2012 case Royal v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia noted that O.C.G.A. § 17-3-2(2), a code section addressing statutes of limitation on criminal prosecutions, provides that “the period within which a prosecution must be commenced . . . does not include any period in which” what?; (b) What does the Court state regarding the imputation of the crime victim’s knowledge of the crime?; (c) What type of knowledge is required – actual or constructive?; (d) Under O.C.G.A. § 17-3-1, when can a prosecution for murder be commenced?; (e) Under this same code section, within what time frame must a prosecution for “for other crimes punishable by death or life imprisonment” be commenced?; (f) Under this same code section, within what time frame must a prosecution for misdemeanors be commenced?
(5) (a) In the 2011 case Hill v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia indicated that “a person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that” what?; (b) However, “a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if” what?; (c) Once evidence of self-defense is presented, what burden is on the State?; (d) According to O.C.G.A. § 16-3-21, what is one of the three circumstances in which a person is NOT justified in using force in self-defense under the code section?; (e) According to O.C.G.A. § 16-3-23.1, “a person who uses threats or force in accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, relating to the use of force in defense of self or others, Code Section 16-3-23, relating to the use of force in defense of a habitation, or Code Section 16-3-24, relating to the use of force in defense of property other than a habitation, has no duty” to do what AND “has the right to” do what?
(6) (8) (a) In the 2009 case Mathis v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia noted that “under OCGA § 16-3-26, which defines the defense of coercion, a person is not guilty of a crime …if the act upon which the supposed criminal liability is based is performed under” what?; (b) As the Court stated, “in order to establish an evidentiary basis for a statutory affirmative defense, the defendant must” do what?
(7) In the 2011 case Millsaps v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia noted that “entrapment is an affirmative defense that is established by showing” what?; (b) “As a general rule, in order to raise the defense of entrapment, the defendant must” do what?; (c) “If the defendant establishes a prima facie case of entrapment, the burden is then upon the State to” to do what?; (d) As noted by the federal district court in the 1994 case Mastroianni v. Deering, “to determine whether entrapment has been established, a line must be drawn between” what?; (e) As further noted by the district court in the Mastroianni case: “It is well settled that the fact that officers or employees of the government merely afford opportunities or facilities for the commission of the offense does not defeat the prosecution.” In fact, what does the Court in indicate “may be employed to catch those engaged in criminal enterprises”?
(8) (a) In the 2011 case Price v. State, the Supreme Court of Georgia noted that “[w]ith respect to the affirmative defense of ‘mistake of fact,’ ‘[a] person shall not be found guilty of a crime if the act or omission to act constituting the crime was induced by’” what?; (b) As also noted by the Court, “[m]istake of fact is a defense to a crime to the extent that” what?; (c) As noted by the Court of Appeals of Georgia in the 2009 case Henry v. State, “[a]ll citizens are presumed to know the law, and” what?
Extra Credit Questions:
(1) (a) In the 2012 case Dryden v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia stated that “[t]he prohibition against double jeopardy in both the United States and Georgia Constitutions, among other things, protects against” what?; (b) What provisions of the U.S. Constitution and the Georgia Constitution does the Court cite after making this statement?; (c) What additional Georgia Code sections does the Court indicate “also provide limitations on multiple prosecutions, convictions, and punishments for the same criminal conduct”?; (d) The Court also indicated that “the Georgia Code expands the proscription of double jeopardy beyond that provided for in the United States and Georgia Constitutions.” Could these state code sections provide less protection of individual rights than the U.S. Constitution does, and why or why not? (Hint: look back to Chapter 1 (page 5) in the textbook.); (e) The Court noted that O.C.G.A. § 16-1-8(a)(1) provides that a prosecution is barred if the accused was what?; (f) What exception to this rule barring prosecution does the Court then discuss and what does this exception state?
(2) (a) In the 2010 case Durrence v. State, the Supreme Court of Georgia noted that “under Georgia law, a person is insane, and shall not be guilty of a crime, if at the time of the act, omission, or negligence constituting the crime, the person” what?; (b) As the Court also noted, a defendant claiming insanity has the burden of proving the defense by what standard of proof?; (c) In the 2012 case McBride v. State, the Court of Appeals of Georgia said what as to the issue of whether an insanity defense requires expert testimony for presentation to the jury?
(3) (a) Competency to stand trial (which differs from insanity at the time of the act) is addressed by the Court of Appeals of Georgia in the 2012 case Tiegreen v. State. According to the Court, which code section “establishes the rebuttable presumption that every person is mentally competent to stand trial”?; (b) What code section does the Court indicate “permits a criminal defendant to procure review of his or her mental competency by properly alleging mental incompetency to stand trial”?; (c) Once incompetency to stand trial is alleged, what is the trial court required to do?; (d) As noted by the Court, in a competency proceeding, the defendant has the burden of proving incompetency by what standard of proof?; (e) The Court noted that “the constitutional test for competency seeks to determine” what three things?
Place this order with us and get 18% discount now! to earn your discount enter this code: special18 If you need assistance chat with us now by clicking the live chat button.