benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1271 / Two men held-up a liquor store in a city. During the robbery, one of the…

Problem

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

question

Two men held-up a liquor store in a city. During the robbery, one of the participants shot and killed the owner of the store. Over a year later, police detectives arrested a defendant after obtaining reliable information that the defendant was the robber who was responsible for killing the store's owner. Afterward, the defendant was taken to the station house where he was booked for the crime and then incarcerated. The next day, the prosecuting attorney made a decision to delay indictment until he could discover the identity of the defendant's accomplice. The defendant was then released from police custody. In this jurisdiction the statute of limitations for murder is five years. Five months later, the prosecuting attorney, after unsuccessfully attempting to secure information on the defendant's cohort, indicted the defendant, charging him with felony murder. Shortly before trial, the only eyewitness to the crime died. He would have testified that the defendant did not participate in the robbery. The defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment because of the delay between the date of the crime and the date of the indictment will most probably be

category

law

options

  1. denied, because the delay did not infringe upon the defendant's rights.
  2. granted, because the delay in prosecuting the defendant actually prejudiced him.
  3. granted, because the defendant was not given the opportunity to confront his accuser.
  4. denied, because pre-indictment delay does not violate the Constitution, as long as it does not exceed an applicable statute of limitations.
  5. denied, because the delay was not excessive and was for a permissible purpose.
  6. granted, because the only eyewitness to the crime died before the trial.
  7. denied, because the defendant was eventually charged within the statute of limitations.
  8. denied, because the prosecutor had a valid reason to delay the indictment.
  9. granted, because the prosecutor failed to find the defendant's accomplice.
  10. granted, because the prosecutor is constitutionally required to press charges, if at all, within a reasonable time after probable cause is established.

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
1271
task_id
81ed0532-0c1d-5eec-bc23-085058a41909
task_key
default--test--1271
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import