Any Misdemeanor Plus Death Equals Manslaughter
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 1 active question. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- CRIMINAL1
Example wrong choices
16021_motorboat-sinker-stephen · CRIMINAL · Choice AWhile mere negligence is insufficient to sustain a murder charge, it is sufficient to sustain a charge of involuntary manslaughter where it results in death.
Why it's attractive
Says mere negligence is sufficient for involuntary manslaughter. The standard is gross/criminal negligence (high and unreasonable risk). Cut as NOT_TRUE — flat misstatement of the criminal negligence threshold.
Why it's wrong
Says mere negligence is sufficient for involuntary manslaughter. The standard is gross/criminal negligence (high and unreasonable risk). Cut as NOT_TRUE — flat misstatement of the criminal negligence threshold.
16021_motorboat-sinker-stephen · CRIMINAL · Choice CHannah's death resulted from Stephen's commission of a dangerous misdemeanor.
Why it's attractive
There is a misdemeanor and there is a death — the unlawful-act argument looks perfect. But Gold Key: the doctrine requires malum in se or inherently dangerous conduct. Certificate lapse by an experienced operator is malum prohibitum. C misstates the doctrine's scope.
Why it's wrong
There is a misdemeanor and there is a death — the unlawful-act argument looks perfect. But Gold Key: the doctrine requires malum in se or inherently dangerous conduct. Certificate lapse by an experienced operator is malum prohibitum. C misstates the doctrine's scope.
16021_motorboat-sinker-stephen · CRIMINAL · Choice DStephen's violation of the statute requiring an operator's certificate made him guilty of culpable negligence per se, since the statute was designed to protect other waterway users against unqualified operators.
Why it's attractive
Negligence per se is a civil-tort doctrine; it has no criminal-law counterpart. The criminal standard is gross/criminal negligence, not per-se liability from statutory violation alone. Cut as NOT_TRUE.
Why it's wrong
Negligence per se is a civil-tort doctrine; it has no criminal-law counterpart. The criminal standard is gross/criminal negligence, not per-se liability from statutory violation alone. Cut as NOT_TRUE.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →