Question.4036 - This optional Quiz 3 pertains largely to the course material covered in the Criminal Law Chapter of your e-text. Each of the first three Sections of the Quiz must be completed in their entirety. The Optional Extra Credit section is worth a maximum of 5 points and should also be responded to. All responses must be submitted in Word or Rich Text formats through Canvas in a timely manner. In submitting your work, you certify to your Instructor that the work submitted is entirely a product of your own efforts and is not, in whole or in part, a product of collaboration with any other Berkeley College student or person.
Answer Below:
QUIZ 3 – Criminal Law Basics Business Law I / Torres Section I. Complete the Sentence. This Section contains ten (10) questions that require Students to fill in the blank in order to complete the sentence correctly. Each correct response in this section is worth one (1) point. All work must be your own without assistance or input from anyone else. (Max. Points for Section = 10 Points). 1. Most crimes today are defined by legislative passage of a __________ and not the common law. 1. Crimes, in general, require: (1) an act or omission and (2) _______________. 1. The requirement that criminal statutes be clear, not vague, and place citizens on reasonable notice of the conduct made criminal is a constitutional one that derives from the ____________ clause of the U.S. Constitution. 1. A criminal conspiracy typically requires an _____________ between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act, or to use unlawful means to achieve an otherwise lawful result, and an act done in furtherance of the conspiracy. 1. The types of criminal statutes that target business executives and financial representatives are commonly referred to as _______-collar crimes. 1. At common law, the crime of bribery, as the act of giving money, property, or any benefit to influence the judgment of a particular person in favor of the giver, was limited to bribes directed to ______________. 1. The crime of ______________ involves threatening someone with bad publicity with the intent to ruin or harm the personal or business reputation of another. 1. Shoplifting is typically a statutory expansion of the common law crime of ____________. 1. The federal crime of ___________ involves buying or selling a publicly-traded stock using confidential information entrusted to you during the course of your employment before it is made public. 1. The federal crime of _____________________ involves the knowing and willful participation in a financial transaction when the transaction is designed to conceal or disguise the source of the funds. 1. Statute 2. Intent (mens rea) 3. Due Process clause 4. Agreement 5. White-collar crimes 6. Public officials 7. Extortion 8. Larceny 9. Insider trading 10. Money laundering Section II. Short Answer/Critical Thought Section. This Section contains three questions that require Students to respond in a well-written short answer. A good response must demonstrate the student’s full and accurate knowledge of the subject matter of the question posed. All responses must be your own without assistance or input from anyone else. (Max. Points for this Section = 10 Points). A. What must a federal Prosecutor prove in order to successfully prosecute someone for a criminal violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Be sure to identify and fully explain each required element and the standard of proof required in general. (5 Point Maximum) A federal prosecutor must establish each of the following components beyond a reasonable doubt in order to effectively prosecute someone under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act: (1) Enterprise existence: The defendant must be a part of a continuing, formal or informal organization that operates continuously. (2) Participation in a pattern of racketeering: The prosecution must show that throughout a ten-year period, the defendant committed at least two predicate offenses (such as fraud, bribery, or money laundering). (3) Connection to the enterprise: Through racketeering activities, the defendant must have taken part in the management or operation of the enterprise. (4) Interstate commerce: The business must have an impact on either domestic or international trade. According to the constitutional standard of proof, which is beyond a reasonable doubt, each element requires proof that the defendant knowingly and purposefully committed crimes as part of the enterprise's operations. B. What are the criminal penalties that may be assessed against a Defendant who is prosecuted successfully under the RICO Act. (3 Point Maximum) According to the RICO Act, a successful prosecution can result in criminal penalties of up to 20 years in prison per violation, with the possibility of life imprisonment if the underlying offense bears a penalty of that kind (such as murder). Defendants are also subject to hefty monetary fines, which might change according to the seriousness and extent of their offenses. Asset forfeiture is a crucial penalty under RICO that requires offenders to give up assets and earnings from racketeering. Businesses, real land, and other assets that support the illegal enterprise fall under this category. By removing their financial support and leadership, these sanctions seek to destroy criminal organizations. C. In a successful civil RICO action, what civil remedies are available to the prevailing party? (2 Points) The prevailing party in a successful civil RICO lawsuit is entitled to treble damages, meaning that the actual losses incurred are tripled. Furthermore, the plaintiff may be able to recoup legal fees and litigation costs, which would make pursuing intricate RICO claims financially feasible. Additionally, courts have the authority to issue injunctive relief, which enables them to stop continuing racketeering or shut down companies that are a part of the illegal activity. These remedies aim to eliminate the systems that enable unlawful behavior and provide victims with full compensation. Section III. Practical Skills Section. This Section consists of three Questions, the first two with subparts, that require the demonstration of basic case research and case reading skills. Perform the basic research requested by each of the questions and respond directly to the questions posed in their respective subparts. All work must be your own without assistance or input from anyone else. (Max. Points for this Section = 30 Points). A. Using Google Scholar, look up the case of U.S. v. McGee using its citation “763 F.3d 304” and type its citation into the search box for “Case law”. Read the Opinion, paying careful attention to Sections I, IIA and III of the Opinion and respond to the questions below. 1. Identify the federal Act under which Defendant McGee is charged with “insider trading?” (2 Points) Timothy McGee was accused of breaking Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which deal with securities fraud, including insider trading. These clauses forbid people from engaging in dishonest tactics or methods when buying or selling securities. 2. Identify the two complementary theories of insider trading liability that are cited by the Third Circuit in this case and state which of these two theories was used to convict Defendant McGee under. (3 Points) The Classical Theory, which deals with corporate insiders who violate a fiduciary duty to their shareholders by trading on material nonpublic information, and the Misappropriation Theory, which applies when someone abuses confidential information entrusted to them, violate a duty to the information source, are the two theories of insider trading liability that the Third Circuit identified in U.S. v. McGee. Because McGee took advantage of a confidential tip that was acquired through a relationship of trust at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, he was found guilty under the misappropriation argument. 3. Explain why the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that there was sufficient evidence to uphold the Defendant’s conviction for securities fraud/insider trading, notwithstanding Defendant McGee’s contention that he got his trading tips not from a professional or executive but from a fellow Alcoholics Anonymous member? (5 Points) The conviction of McGee for securities fraud was upheld by the Third Circuit due to the presence of adequate evidence. A fellow member of Alcoholics Anonymous shared confidential information regarding the sale of Philadelphia Consolidated Holding Corp., which McGee stole. The court decided that the trust built in the Alcoholics Anonymous framework produced an obligation, even though McGee claimed that the connection had no professional links. He met the requirements for misappropriation theory culpability by knowingly misusing the information in his later stock purchase and $292,000 profit. B. Corporations may have rights by virtue of “morals clauses” inserted in contracts for criminal conduct by those employees. The popular cases involving actor Charlie Sheen and golfing champion Tiger Woods are just two of many such examples. 1. What are “morals clauses” and what do they typically cover? (10 Points) Contractual provisions known as "morals clauses" give businesses or sponsors the right to end an agreement if a party's actions go against the organization's principles or damage its reputation. Criminal activity, public controversies, or actions judged unethical or detrimental to the brand's reputation are usually covered. These provisions, which are frequently found in contracts for endorsements, entertainment, and employment, aid businesses in safeguarding their interests when a person's behavior could adversely impact their reputation or sources of income. 2. Research either the Sheen or Woods cases and state for the celebrity chosen: (1) whether criminal conduct was involved, and (b) what rights were asserted by their corporate employers/sponsors. (5 Points). Although there was no particular criminal activity in Charlie Sheen's case, his unpredictable and contentious public persona which included substance addiction and private scandals sparked worries under the morality clause. Warner Bros. used this clause in his contract for the television series Two and a Half Men as justification for firing him. By claiming that his actions were against their standards, the studio was able to terminate the contract without incurring further obligations. This instance illustrates how morality clauses allow businesses to disassociate themselves from actions that harm their brand. C. Using either Google Scholar or Westlaw Campus Research, look up the following case entitled Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. Don King, 533 U.S. 158 (2001) and answer the following question after reading the U.S. Supreme Court Opinion. Briefly, the Petitioner, Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd., is a corporation that promotes boxing matches. Petitioner sued Don King, the president and sole shareholder/owner of Don King Productions, a corporation, claiming that King had conducted the boxing-related affairs of Don King Productions in part through a RICO "pattern," i.e., through the alleged commission of at least two instances of fraud and other RICO predicate crimes. The lower courts dismissed the complaint because, in their view, RICO and its provisions apply only where a plaintiff shows the existence of two separate entities, a "person" and a distinct "enterprise," the affairs of which that "person" improperly conducts. In this case, "it is undisputed that King was an employee" (and sole owner) of the corporation Don King Productions and that King was also "acting within the scope of his authority." Did the Supreme Court find that Don King violated the RICO Act? Explain why or why not. (5 Points) The U.S. Supreme Court determined that Don King could be held accountable under the RICO Act in the case of Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. Don King. Even though King was the only owner and president of Don King Productions, Inc., the Court decided that King was the "person" and the company was the "enterprise" for RICO purposes. According to the Court, a corporation is a distinct legal body from the individuals who own or run it. Therefore, the RICO requirement that a "person" engage with a "enterprise" through a pattern of racketeering activity was satisfied by King's claimed acts in running the corporation's operations through illicit activities.The lower court had dismissed the complaint on the grounds that King and his corporation were not sufficiently different, but this verdict overturned that finding. In keeping with the statute's goal of preventing the abuse of lawful businesses for illicit purposes, the Supreme Court underlined that RICO's intent includes dealing with circumstances in which people utilize corporations to commit crimes. Section IV. Optional Extra Credit This optional section consists of one question and is worth a maximum of five (5) extra credit points. Identify and explain three significant differences between Criminal Law and the Civil Law that involve the parties, the burden of proof and the remedies sought. Among the main distinctions between criminal and civil law are the persons concerned, the burden of proof, and the remedies sought. To preserve public safety and order, the government prosecutes the accused under criminal law; the defendant may be subject to fines or incarceration. Private parties file civil law cases to settle disagreements about rights or responsibilities, such as contract violations or bodily injury. In civil law, the burden of proof is typically "preponderance of the evidence," which means that one party's claim is more likely than not to be true. In criminal law, however, the burden of proof is significantly higher "beyond a reasonable doubt" because of the serious penalties involved. Last but not least, civil law remedies usually entail compensation measures like monetary damages or injunctions to settle the issue and recompense the harmed party, whereas criminal remedies are punitive, intended to punish and discourage crime.More Articles From LAW
.ico)
.ico)
.ico)
.ico)
