Select the Correct legal Definition of a Crime

There are numerous different crimes with which a person can be charged, and they all have specific criteria that must be met. As a police officer, you must know the statutes of your jurisdiction and be able to apply them accurately. Your ability to decipher if a scenario satisfies the criteria of a specific crime is important and will be assessed on the exam. The questions of this type will provide a definition and then ask you to make a judgment as to which scenario meets or does not meet the criteria. To do so, you must understand how to interpret a definition logically. This type of problem involves deductive reasoning since the conclusion is definitive and is based on facts presented. Let us consider several examples.

Consider the following definition:

A person is guilty of burglary in the third degree when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building with intent to commit a crime therein.

This definition comprises two distinct pieces, both of which are important.

  1. The person unlawfully enters OR unlawfully remains in a building.
  2. The person intends to commit a crime.

Notice how each and every word of the definition is important and contributes meaningfully to the definition. Of note is the use of the word “or” in the first criterion. Logically, this criterion is satisfied if either condition holds; both do not need to hold for it to be satisfied! Also, there is an implied “and” between the criteria, meaning that both must be satisfied for a person to be guilty of this crime. If only one of the two is satisfied, then the person cannot be considered guilty of that specific crime.

A typical question would be as follows:

Question: Based solely on this definition, which of the following is the best example of burglary in the third degree?

Notice the underlined phrase. It is vital when working through this type of problem that you do not use other criteria beyond what is listed, even if other conditions of a scenario are illegal. Some choices will be included that provide information that breaks a different law but does NOT officially qualify as satisfying the given definition. The following are some standard choices:

    1. George, a bagger at Eagle Foods, climbs through an open window of the store after operating hours to retrieve his backpack, which he inadvertently left there after his shift.
    2. Peter enters the public library through a door that does not securely lock to steal several valuable DVDs and reference books.
    3. Monica, an employee of Hot Sam Pretzels, hides in the back room to sneak out the back exit to avoid encountering her boss, who she knows wants her to work an additional shift.
    4. Enrique climbs the exterior stairs of an office building so he can stargaze with his friends.

So, which is it? Choice (A) involves a person unlawfully entering the building, but there is no intent to commit a crime, so condition (ii) does not hold. Choice (C) does not satisfy the criteria since the person is leaving the building to simply avoid somebody—that’s not a crime! Choice (D) does not involve the person entering the building. Even though it may be unlawful to be on the grounds after hours, this is not part of the criterion. Moreover, stargazing is not a crime. Finally, Choice (B) must be it! And common sense supports this choice. The person is entering a public building with the intention of stealing material from within the building. This is the correct choice.

Here is another example. Consider the following definition:

In State X, a person is guilty of robbery in the third degree when he forcibly steals property.

There are two distinct criteria in this definition:

  1. The person uses force of some kind, AND
  2. The person steals property.

A typical question would be as follows:

  1. Based solely on this definition, which of the following is least likely to be an example of robbery in the third degree?

    1. Randy pushes a teen off his motorbike and steals it.
    2. Teri takes a package left by the mail carrier off her neighbor’s doorstep and keeps it.
    3. Scott pins a woman against the trunk of her SUV and takes her purse.
    4. Dan grabs his roommate by the throat, shoves him onto the floor, and steals his wallet.

So, which is it this time? Choices (A), (C), and (D) all involve the assailant using force of some type and then taking something that is not theirs. Choice (B), however, does not involve the use of force. So, even though it does involve taking property that is not hers, this does not satisfy the definition of Robbery in the Third Degree.

The definitions can be more complicated. For instance, consider the following definition:

The crime of statutory rape is committed when:

  1. A male or female, being 21 years of age or more, engages in sexual intercourse with a male or female 17 years of age or under, OR
  2. A male or female, being 18 years of age or more, engages in sexual intercourse with a male or female 14 years of age or under, OR
  3. A male or female, being 16 years of age or more, engages in sexual intercourse with a male or female 11 years of age or under.

This definition involves three distinct sets of criteria, only one of which needs to be satisfied. And each of the three criteria is composed of three pieces of information (age of one person, age of the other person, and the act of sexual intercourse), ALL of which must be satisfied.

A typical question would be as follows:

  1. According to this definition, which of the following is the best example of statutory rape?

    1. Theo, a 16-year-old male, engages in sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old female.
    2. Henry, a 17-year-old male, engages in sexual intercourse with an 11-year-old female.
    3. Nate, a 22-year-old male, engages in sexual intercourse with an 18-year-old female.
    4. Ian, a 15-year-old male, engages in sexual intercourse with an 11-year-old female.

The only choice among these that satisfies the age combinations of one of the three distinct criteria comprising the definition of statutory rape is Choice (B). It satisfies criterion (iii).

Sometimes, there are different levels of a particular crime, and going from one level to another involves adding more criteria or strengthening existing ones. You must be able to distinguish between such levels by pinpointing their differences. 

For example, consider the following two definitions:

  1. A person commits the offense of stalking when he or she follows, places under surveillance, or contacts another person at or about a place or places without the consent of the other person for the purpose of harassing and intimidating the other person.
  2. A person commits the offense of aggravated stalking when such person, in violation of a temporary restraining order, temporary protective order, permanent restraining order, permanent protective order, condition of probation, or condition of parole prohibiting this behavior, places under surveillance, or contacts another person at or about a place or places without the consent of the other person for the purpose of harassing and intimidating the other person.

Here, the main difference is that a stalker guilty of aggravated stalking must violate a temporary or permanent restraining order or order of protection. Be certain not to introduce other criteria that are not already present in the definition, such as presuming that aggravated stalking involves a threat or injury that is more severe than is involved in non-aggravated stalking.