Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
The case has gone to the jury, which has thus far found that the neighbor died instantly from the third shot and that the defendant was no longer in fear of being attacked by her when he fired the third shot.
In a criminal trial, the evidence has shown that the defendant's neighbor entered the defendant's house with a knife and told the defendant that she was going to kill him. The defendant ran to his bedroom, picked up a gun, and told the neighbor to back off. The neighbor did not stop and stabbed the defendant in the arm. The defendant then shot the neighbor twice. The neighbor fell to the floor and lay quietly moaning. After a few seconds, the defendant fired a third shot into the neighbor.
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. Because the defendant killed the neighbor, the crime would not be attempted murder but would be either murder or manslaughter. Whether the defendant is guilty of murder or manslaughter depends on whether he fired the third shot in the heat of passion provoked by the neighbor's earlier attack.
B is incorrect. It is true that the defendant could properly be convicted of manslaughter. However, he could also be convicted of murder if the jury finds that he did not fire the third shot in the heat of passion.
D is incorrect. The defendant was not in imminent fear of the neighbor, and therefore was not acting in self-defense, when he fired the third shot. Whether the defendant is guilty of murder or manslaughter depends on whether the jury finds that he fired the third shot in the heat of passion provoked by the neighbor's earlier attack.