Created by
Terms in this set (34)
Read the "Chapter Skill-Building Exercise" section on p. 177 in the textbook and answer the following questions (not the questions listed in the book)
a. Can Hanousek be convicted of a crime under these circumstances? (yes or no)
b. Why or why not? (which doctrine of criminal liability might apply)
c. Suppose that at trial, Hanousek argued that he could not be convicted because he did not know about the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Would this defense be successful? (yes or no)
d. Why or why not?
a. Can Hanousek be convicted of a crime under these circumstances? (yes or no)
b. Why or why not? (which doctrine of criminal liability might apply)
c. Suppose that at trial, Hanousek argued that he could not be convicted because he did not know about the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Would this defense be successful? (yes or no)
d. Why or why not?
a. yes
b. Under the responsible corporate officer doctrine, a corporate officer may be criminally liable for the actions of employees under his or her supervision, even if the officer did not participate in or know about the criminal violation. In this case, Hanousek was responsible for the safe and efficient maintenance and construction of the rock quarry project.
c. no
d. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Mistake of law, including lack of information about the law or a mistaken idea about what the law requires, is not a defense to criminal liability.
Also, in this case, it was Hanousek's job to know. He was the corporate officer responsible for ensuring that the company complied with the law.
b. Under the responsible corporate officer doctrine, a corporate officer may be criminally liable for the actions of employees under his or her supervision, even if the officer did not participate in or know about the criminal violation. In this case, Hanousek was responsible for the safe and efficient maintenance and construction of the rock quarry project.
c. no
d. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Mistake of law, including lack of information about the law or a mistaken idea about what the law requires, is not a defense to criminal liability.
Also, in this case, it was Hanousek's job to know. He was the corporate officer responsible for ensuring that the company complied with the law.
Carl appears on television shows touting a cure for COVID-19 that he knows is fraudulent, because it has no medical validity. He asks viewers to send money to make the "cure" widely available, and provides an address for viewers to mail in donations. As a result, Carl collects thousands of dollars from donors who were trying to fund a cure for COVID-19.