benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1257 / An older and younger brother had always done everything together. They had grown…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

An older and younger brother had always done everything together. They had grown up together, gone to school together, and partied together. One night, while drinking at a bar, both brothers decided that they wanted a little more action than the bar was offering up, so they left and went to a strip club. At the strip club, they paid for private dances and attempted to have conversations with the women. As hard as they tried, the women who worked in the club did not seem as interested in the brothers as they were in the women. As the night wore on, the brothers decided that they would wait behind the club until closing for the women to come out. The victim, who had given a dance to one of the brothers, came out and proceeded to walk to her car. One of the brothers grabbed the victim from behind and pulled her to the ground while the other brother sexually assaulted her. Both brothers were arrested and charged with the rape of the victim. Their long-time family attorney represented them both at their trial. The younger brother intended to testify that his older brother had forced him to hold the victim down by threatening him with a gun. If appropriate objections are made by either brother, the court should rule that the attorney's representation of the brothers at trial

category

law

options

  1. did not violate the older brother's constitutional rights if he separately paid for his representation.
  2. violated the older brother's Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
  3. violated both brothers' Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
  4. did not violate any constitutional rights as long as the attorney had the consent of both brothers.
  5. constituted an impermissible conflict of interest only if the brothers had not been informed of the potential conflict.
  6. violated the younger brother's constitutional rights, but did not infringe on the older brother's rights if he was not threatened with a gun.
  7. violated the younger brother's constitutional rights, but did not infringe on the older brother's constitutional rights.
  8. violated the younger brother's Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
  9. did not constitute a conflict of interest if the attorney had the consent of both brothers.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

upstream_id / Original problem ID
1257
task_id
e872dce7-5b81-59a2-a765-57db62c7ab75
task_key
default--test--1257
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import