Criminal Law

MPC mental disease or mental defect: 1. A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks a substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. 2.

"mental disease or defect" does not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct.

What is necessity under MPC

(1) Conduct that the actor believes to be necessary to avoid a harm or evil to himself or to another is justifiable, provided that: (a) The harm or evil sought to be avoided by such conduct is greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged; . . . (2) When the actor was reckless or negligent in bringing about the situation requiring a choice of harms or evils or in appraising the necessity for his conduct, the justification afforded by this Section is unavailable in a prosecution for any offense for which recklessness or negligence suffices to establish culpability.

What is something (intervening events/action) that may cut off causation?

-3rd party actions, what happens when they get to the hospital and how the doctors/professionals do to help, -natural cause (lightening striking)

what is the difference between CL and MPC conspiracy in regard to agreement?

-CL insists on an actual real agreement between the parties (one that isnt the police) -MPC allows a unilateral agreement as long as D believes someone is agreeing with him -MPC takes the position that it can be just a one sided agreement. "you think you're entering into an agreement but the other person might be an undercover cop". This is ok under the MPC but not under CL

difference between necessity under MPC and CL

-No imminence requirement under the MPC -MPC would possibly allow a defense for homicide but the CL does not -MPC is not as black and white as CL might tend to be CL is binary (either an element is not met, you don't get a defense) whereas MPC recognizes a spectrum (you might get the defense, just depends; not an on or off like it is with CL)

Name the 5 situations under Voluntary Manslaughter's categorical test

1. Aggravated assault or battery 2. Observation of a serious crime against a close relative 3. Illegal arrest (when people would do citizens arrest) 4. Mutual combat 5. Catching one's wife in the act of adultery

what are the elements of actus reus

1. Conduct- voluntary act unless omission is sufficient for liability 2. Causation 3. Harmful result

What are elements of voluntary manslaughter's modern reasonable person test?

1. D acted in a heat of passion; 2. Provocation was one of the five things from the categorical test 3. D did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing; 4. A reasonable person in the D's shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool; and 5. Causal connection between provocation, passion, and the killing

what are the 3 approaches to voluntary manslaughter?

1. Early common law categorical test 2. Modern reasonable person test 3. MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED)

what are the two rules of thumb in figuring out whether offense is strict liability when no mens rea is listed?

1. If purpose of law is more punishment of wrongdoer than regulation of social order, mens rea is required. 2. If penalty is light (fine and no prison), no mens rea requirement.

Elements of duress

1. Immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm 2. Well grounded fear that threat will be carried out 3. No reasonable opportunity to escape

There are 4 diff mental states that can constitute malice aforethought (4 ways of getting to a murder charge under the common law). What are they?

1. Intent to kill, including knowledge that death was substantially certain 2. Intent or knowledge of serious (or grievous) bodily harm 3. Depraved heart murder- extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk 4. felony murder rule- strict liability for the homicide committed during commission of felony (don't have to have mens rea. Only need intent to commit the felony and then a killing that occurs during the death)

There are 3 different categories of specific intent. what are they

1. Intention by the actor to commit some future act, separate from the actus reus (possession with intent to sell). 2. Proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause humiliation) 3. Proof of actor's awareness of an attendant circumstance (intent to sell obscene literature to a person known to be under the age of 18).

what are the common law theft crimes?

1. Larceny (catch all) 2. Embezzlement 3. False pretenses

There are 2 types of intervening causes. what are they?

1. Responsive (dependent) intervening cause: follows as a direct result of first wrong. General rule: a responsive intervening cause does NOT relieve initial wrongdoer unless the response was not only unforeseeable but also highly abnormal or bizarre. 2. Coincidental (independent) intervening causes: in the wrong place at the wrong time. Rule of thumb: coincidental intervening cause relieves the original wrongdoer of criminal responsibility unless it was foreseeable.

The following is 5 categories where you are obligated to step in and help or else you may be criminally liable. What are the 5 categories?

1. Statute imposes a duty 2. Certain status relationship with another Parent/child, teacher/student, employer/employee, prison guard/prisoner. Anytime where someone is in the custodial care of someone else 3. Assumed a contractual duty of care for another 4. One has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid 5. Person creates a risk of harm to another

Under felony murder rule's 3 limitations of res gestae, what are the 2 requirements?

1. Temporal: felony and homicide must be close in time and geographical proximity (continues until D reaches a place of temporary safety). Until you've reached a place of temporary safety, the felony is still ongoing. So if you kill someone in that escape, felony murder rule can apply 2. Causal connection between felony and homicide. some court say as long as there's a but for connection, that's all that matters even if it seems unlikely that the killing occurred from your actions Other courts (like the weed plane crash) will be looking for more, will be looking for more of a direct connection.

what are the elements of self defense?

1. Threatened with an imminent threat of unlawful force; 2. Force used was necessary to repel the threat; 3. Force used was proportionate to the threatened force.

What are the 4 types of situations where involuntary intoxication might come up?

1. Where intoxication was caused by the fault of another (force, duress, fraud) 2. Where intoxication was caused by innocent mistake (took a hallucinogenic pill believing it to be aspirin) 3. Where D unknowingly suffers from a physiological or psychological condition that renders him abnormally susceptible to a legal intoxicant ("Pathological intoxication") 4. Where unexpected intoxication results from a medically prescribed drug

what are the 2 exceptions to the CL/MPC general rule of mistake of law?

1. a person reasonably relies on an official interpretation of the law that turns out to be erroneous (entrapment by estoppel) 2. Ignorance can be a defense if knowledge that the prohibited conduct is unlawful is an element of the crime. (Lack of knowledge negates the mens rea.) general rule: ignorance of the law is no excuse

felony murder rule If it's an unenumerated felony (so not rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and kidnapping) what are the 3 limitations you must look at?

1. inherently dangerous felony limitation 2. res gestae requirement 3. merger doctrine

what are the MPC's unintentional homicides

1. murder 2. manslaughter 3. negligent homicide

what are the 4 justifications for punishment?

1.Deterrence (general or specific) 2.Incapacitation 3.Rehabilitation 4.Retribution the first 3 are the utilitarianism approach

With CL murder, there is intent to kill in the __________ and ___________ degree

1st and 2nd degree

What do you need for 1st degree murder under common law

1st degree murder requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation 2nd degree murder only requires intent to kill

Step 1: If it's a intentional killing, start with _________ degree murder

2nd

intent to kill including knowledge that death would result or Intent to commit serious bodily harm (including knowledge). What homicide is this?

2nd degree murder CL

In the MPC approach to actus reus, the following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section: A reflex or convulsion; __________________________________________________________________________________; Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep

In the MPC approach to actus reus, the following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section: A reflex or convulsion; A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; __________________________________________________________________________________

A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

MPC mental disease or mental defect: 1. 2. "mental disease or defect" does not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct.

A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks a substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.

voluntary manslaughter's modern reasonable person test: 1. D acted in a heat of passion; 2. Provocation was one of the five things from the categorical test. 3. D did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing; 4. 5. Causal connection between provocation, passion, and the killing

A reasonable person in the D's shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool

In the MPC approach to actus reus, the following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section: _____________________________________; A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

A reflex or convulsion

In the MPC approach to actus reus, what is the 4 not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section?

A reflex or convulsion; A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

__________________ is either Felony murder rule or depraved heart murder (extreme recklessness) A) unintentional murder B) involuntary manslaughter C) negligent homicide

A) unintentional murder

Unlawful killing of human being is committed with malice aforethought and constitutes murder when any one of four conditions are present: 1. Intent to kill 2. Intent to commit serious bodily injury 3. 4. Felony murder rule applies

Abandoned and malignant heart or depraved heart

2 types of causation must be proven to establish criminal liability: what are they?

Actual (or but for) causation- Def's conduct must be an actual or but for cause of the social harm Proximate causation- def's conduct must be the proximate or legal cause of the social harm

The following are elements to ___________. 1. Conduct- voluntary act unless omission is sufficient for liability (5 categories) 2. Causation 3. Harmful result

Actus reus

Elements of accomplice liability: 1. Mens rea of an accomplice: dual intent—intent to aid the principal party and intent that the principal commit that crime. 2. 3. Causation not an issue in the sense that it doesn't matter if the principal would have committed the crime without the accomplice's help.

Actus reus: solicitation of the offense, active assistance in the commission of the crime, encouragement of the offense.

A person is guilty of rape if he: 1. Engages in vaginal intercourse with another person 2. By force or threat of force 3. 4. Without the consent of the other person

Against the will

Under Voluntary Manslaughter's categorical test, there are 5 situations: 1. 2. Observation of a serious crime against a close relative 3. Illegal arrest (when people would do citizens arrest) 4. Mutual combat 5. Catching one's wife in the act of adultery

Aggravated assault or battery

when looking for causation, should you do the but-for test first and then the proximate cause, or vice versa?

Always do but for cause first and then proceed to prox cause

Define Malicious: 1. 2.Recklessness as to whether such harm should occur or not.

An actual intent to do the harm.

The following is 5 categories where you are obligated to step in and help or else you may be criminally liable: 1. Statute imposes a duty 2. Certain status relationship with another 3. 4. One has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid 5. Person creates a risk of harm to another

Assumed a contractual duty of care for another When def enters in to a contract which requires him or her either explicitly/implicitly to act in a particular way

_____________ is either recklessness or criminal neg A) unintentional murder B) involuntary manslaughter C) negligent homicide

B) involuntary manslaughter

Under actus reus, you either need a voluntary act or say def can be liable for an omission. But not everyone is liable for an omission Who might be liable for omission?

But a parent is liable for an omission in a parent-child relationship Parent's failure to act and take care of child's medical needs

what is the but-for test?

But for the defendant's voluntary acts, would the social harm have occurred when it did? this is actual cause

When is D the actual cause of the result?

But for the defendant's voluntary acts, would the social harm not have occurred when it did

A person is guilty of rape if he: 1. Engages in vaginal intercourse with another person 2. 3. Against the will 4. Without the consent of the other person

By force or threat of force

Embezzlement elements: 1. Intentional conversion of 2. Property of another 3.

By someone who is already in lawful possession of it

______________________ is crim neg, not used much in common law A) unintentional murder B) involuntary manslaughter C) negligent homicide

C) negligent homicide

Is this mens rea CL or MPC? Wilfully, maliciously, intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently

CL

when grading criminal attempts, which one looks at how many steps are left to take? MPC or CL

CL

Step 2: Consider whether it can be bumped up to __________________________, which requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation. Or bumped down to voluntary manslaughter

CL 1st degree murder

Under Voluntary Manslaughter's categorical test, there are 5 situations: 1. Aggravated assault or battery 2. Observation of a serious crime against a close relative 3. Illegal arrest (when people would do citizens arrest) 4. Mutual combat 5.

Catching one's wife in the act of adultery

Felony murder rule: res gestae: 1. Temporal: felony and homicide must be close in time and geographical proximity (continues until D reaches a place of temporary safety). Until you've reached a place of temporary safety, the felony is still ongoing. So if you kill someone in that escape, felony murder rule can apply 2.

Causal connection between felony and homicide. some court say as long as there's a but for connection, that's all that matters even if it seems unlikely that the killing occurred from your actions Other courts (like the weed plane crash) will be looking for more, will be looking for more of a direct connection.

voluntary manslaughter's modern reasonable person test: 1. D acted in a heat of passion; 2. Provocation was one of the five things from the categorical test. 3. D did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing; 4. A reasonable person in the D's shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool; and 5.

Causal connection between provocation, passion, and the killing

Elements of necessity: 1. Harm avoided greater than harm caused. 2. D seeking to avoid clear & imminent danger. 3. his illegal conduct would abate the harm. 4. No effective legal alternative. 5. Legislature has not spoken on issue. 6. D not at fault in creating situation.

Causal connection: reasonable for D to believe

Elements of accomplice liability: 1. Mens rea of an accomplice: dual intent—intent to aid the principal party and intent that the principal commit that crime. 2. Actus reus: solicitation of the offense, active assistance in the commission of the crime, encouragement of the offense. 3.

Causation not an issue in the sense that it doesn't matter if the principal would have committed the crime without the accomplice's help.

False Pretenses elements: 1. False statement of fact that 2. 3. To pass title to the def 4. Def knew statement was false AND 5. Def intended to defraud the victim

Causes the victim

The following is 5 categories where you are obligated to step in and help or else you may be criminally liable: 1. Statute imposes a duty 2. 3. Assumed a contractual duty of care for another 4. One has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid 5. Person creates a risk of harm to another

Certain status relationship with another Ex. husband/wife, child/parent

Just has to be unforeseeable to cut off chain of causation which will then relieve wrongdoer of liability what type of intervening cause is this?

Coincidental (independent) intervening cause

______________________________________ relieves the original wrongdoer of criminal responsibility unless it was foreseeable. it's a type of intervening cause

Coincidental (independent) intervening cause

in the wrong place at the wrong time

Coincidental (independent) intervening cause

______________________ relieves the original wrongdoer of criminal responsibility unless it was foreseeable.

Coincidental (independent) intervening cause:

M convinced B that M was a former Navy SEAL working for the CIA. M told B that the CIA wanted to recruit B as an agent to participate in a complicated CIA operation, "Double White." This operation required B to stage a robbery of the Wal-Mart at which B and B's wife worked in order to "establish his outlaw status so that he could more easily infiltrate a drug cartel." M instructed B on how to conduct the robbery, including the requirement that B not wear a mask or gloves "and to make sure the cameras in the store caught the robbery on tape so the drug cartel would know that B robbed the store." B did so, believing that the money he took would be immediately be returned to Wal-Mart." Robbery is defined as forceable taking of another with intent to permanently deprive such person of the prop. Apply CL and then MPC mistake of fact

Common Law: Specific or general intent crime? Specific, two mens rea. Have intent to take prop and intent to permanently deprive (not just borrowing, don't plan on giving it back). Apply rule: His mistake only has to be in good faith (common law rule). He has a defense under this common law rule. Because he could make the case he was just an idiot and just naive and convince jury that this is true. As long as jury believes him, he has a defense. If you have a specific intent crime, doesn't matter how unreasonable it is, if you can convince the jury it was your honest belief, you have a defense MPC: Same result under MPC because: Robbery is taking of prop and intent to permanently deprive. Under 2.04, as long as mistake negates whatever mens rea is required. Intent is required and his mistake means that he didn't intend to permanently deprive and jury believes him

In the MPC approach to actus reus, the following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section: A reflex or convulsion; A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; __________________________________________________________________________________; A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion

Necessity under MPC (1) (2) When the actor was reckless or negligent in bringing about the situation requiring a choice of harms or evils or in appraising the necessity for his conduct, the justification afforded by this Section is unavailable in a prosecution for any offense for which recklessness or negligence suffices to establish culpability.

Conduct that the actor believes to be necessary to avoid a harm or evil to himself or to another is justifiable, provided that: (a) The harm or evil sought to be avoided by such conduct is greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged; . . .

Actus Reus elements: 1. 2. Causation 3. Harmful result

Conduct- voluntary act unless omission is sufficient for liability

Steps for determining what type of homicide it is: Step 1: If intentional killing, start with 2nd degree murder Step 2:

Consider whether it can be bumped up to CL 1st degree murder, which requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation. Or bumped down to voluntary manslaughter

What is the minority rule for defense of others

Could only have defense of others if you: 1. Were correct about the need to use force Ex. That the person you are defending would have been justified in using force (Act-at-Peril rule) AND 2. If you were in a special status relationship with the person being protected Ex. Wouldn't have the defense if you were protecting a complete stranger

Who is the reasonable person under common law for the modern reasonable person test?

Courts are inconsistent with this analysis. • Sometimes, courts will consider the D's situation for whether the provocation was adequate, such as race, disability, sex, age, etc. • But for considering whether a reasonable person would have lost control, often only look at age and sometimes sex

voluntary manslaughter's modern reasonable person test: 1. 2. Provocation was one of the five things from the categorical test. 3. D did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing; 4. A reasonable person in the D's shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool; and 5. Causal connection between provocation, passion, and the killing

D acted in a heat of passion

Under common law legal wrong doctrine: Statute 1: promoting prostitution in the first degree (that he was convicted of): it is illegal to induce a person under 16 years of age to engage in prostitution. Statute 2 (footnote 5 on p. 259) promoting prostitution in the third degree if he induces or causes a person 16 years of age or older to engage in prostitution. Because D induced someone under 16, even if he reasonably believed she was 16 or older, under the common law, can D be guilty of the first degree (higher) crime?

D can be guilty of the first degree (higher) crime. Common law says bc you were still committing a crime, even if we the jury believes you had a mistake of thinking the girl was over 16, that's not a defense bc you're still committing a crime (albeit a diff crime) Prostitution is typically general intent crime. Unless there is a 2nd mens rea saying the def "knew"

voluntary manslaughter's modern reasonable person test: 1. D acted in a heat of passion; 2. Provocation was one of the five things from the categorical test. 3. 4. A reasonable person in the D's shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool; and 5. Causal connection between provocation, passion, and the killing

D did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing;

Elements of necessity: 1. Harm avoided greater than harm caused. 2. D seeking to avoid clear & imminent danger. 3. Causal connection: reasonable for D to believe his illegal conduct would abate the harm. 4. No effective legal alternative. 5. Legislature has not spoken on issue. 6.

D not at fault in creating situation.

Elements of necessity: 1. Harm avoided greater than harm caused. 2. 3. Causal connection: reasonable for D to believe his illegal conduct would abate the harm. 4. No effective legal alternative. 5. Legislature has not spoken on issue. 6. D not at fault in creating situation.

D seeking to avoid clear & imminent danger.

under the ______________ test, you must be dangerously close to that person. If you don't know where the person is, you're not in close __________ to the success of your crime. You have to have found that person

Dangerous Proximity Test proximity

Using the dangerous proximity test: Man starts from Boston to Cambridge for purpose of committing a murder when he gets there but is stopped by the draw bridge and goes home. does this pass the test?

Dangerous proximity not met. Draw bridge was stopping. Def not close enough to victim to pull that off

False Pretenses elements: 1. False statement of fact that 2. Causes the victim 3. To pass title to the def 4. Def knew statement was false AND 5.

Def intended to defraud the victim

False Pretenses elements: 1. False statement of fact that 2. Causes the victim 3. To pass title to the def 4. 5. Def intended to defraud the victim

Def knew statement was false

what is the exception to self defense?

Defendant cannot allege self defense when the defendant has provoked the conflict or is the aggressor in it, UNLESS defendant withdrew from altercation in good faith and informed victim by words or acts. If someone threatens to punch you and you punch them. The person who threatened you is the aggressor

What is the basic rule of necessity?

Defendant's actions must be necessary to prevent an even greater harm from occurring.

4 diff mental states that can constitute malice aforethought (4 ways of getting to a murder charge under the common law): 1. Intent to kill, including knowledge that death was substantially certain 2. Intent or knowledge of serious (or grievous) bodily harm 3. 4. felony murder rule- strict liability for the homicide committed during commission of felony (don't have to have mens rea. Only need intent to commit the felony and then a killing that occurs during the death)

Depraved heart murder- extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk

4 Justifications for Punishment: 1. 2.Incapacitation 3.Rehabilitation 4.Retribution

Deterrence (general or specific)

Distinguishing larceny by trick and false pretenses

Difference is about title. Larceny by trick: only poss is transferred False pretenses both possession and title is transferred

The 3 approaches to voluntary manslaughter: 1. 2. Modern reasonable person test 3. MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED)

Early common law categorical test

Theft crimes: 1. Larceny (catch all) 2. 3. False pretenses

Embezzlement

A person is guilty of rape if he: 1. 2. By force or threat of force 3. Against the will 4. Without the consent of the other person

Engages in vaginal intercourse with another person

CL Legal wrong doctrine is the exception to the mistake of fact rule (exception to the rule that a reasonable mistake of rule can be a defense in a general intent crime) • Exception to rule that a reasonable mistake of fact is a defense for a general intent crime. There are 2 things that make you think about legal wrong doctrine: must have a mistake of fact and it can only work if you have 2 statues that are closely related. The legal wrong doctrine says that even if you were reasonable in your mistake, if the conduct you thought you were engaging in is still illegal, we can convict you of the higher crime. Your reasonable mistake of fact defense goes away. ...youre still violating a law and were not letting you get away with it

Example • Statute 1: promoting prostitution in the first degree: it is illegal to induce a person under 16 years of age to engage in prostitution. • Statute 2: promoting prostitution in the third degree if he induces or causes a person 16 years of age or older to engage in prostitution. • Because D induced someone under 16, even if he reasonably believed she was 16 or older, under the common law, D can be guilty of the first degree (higher) crime. Often see this with reasonable mistake of age, or grams or weight of drugs Under MPC 2.04(2) legal wrong doctrine: Although ignorance or mistake would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the D would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the D shall reduce the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be convicted to those of the offense of which he would have been guilty had the situation been as he supposed. So going back, reasonable mistake of fact under common law would still be a violation of law and he's convicted of statute 1. and under MPC he could be convicted of statute 2

___________________________________ has an extreme emotional reaction to something, as a result of which there is loss of self control and reason is overborne by intense feelings such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation or other similar emotions

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance

True or false Deadly force can always be used for crime prevention or to effectuate arrests for misdemeanors

FALSE Deadly force can never be used for crime prevention or to effectuate arrests for misdemeanors

True or false Attempted involuntary murder is possible bc its an unintentional crime

False Attempted involuntary murder does not work bc that's not an intentional crime. Attempted murder can only be an intentional killing

True or false A person never has an obligation to step in and help another

False Generally, you have no obligation to step in and help unless unless you fall under these any of the 5 categories: 1. Statute imposes a duty 2. Certain status relationship with another 3. Assumed a contractual duty of care for another 4. One has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid 5. Person creates a risk of harm to another

Theft crimes: 1. Larceny (catch all) 2. Embezzlement 3.

False pretenses

False Pretenses elements: 1. 2. Causes the victim 3. To pass title to the def 4. Def knew statement was false AND 5. Def intended to defraud the victim

False statement of fact that

Under felony murder rule's Res gestae requirement there are two parts. what are they?

Felony and homicide must be close in time and distance. Meaning there must be both temporal and geographical proximity between the homicide and causal connection between the felony and the homicide

what are the types of unintentional murder?

Felony murder rule or depraved heart murder (extreme recklessness)

Unlawful killing of human being is committed with malice aforethought and constitutes murder when any one of four conditions are present: 1. Intent to kill 2. Intent to commit serious bodily injury 3. Abandoned and malignant heart or depraved heart OR 4.

Felony murder rule applies

Both police and private citizens can use non-deadly force (running/tackling someone) if they have a reasonable belief that: 1. Such other person is committing or has committed a felony or a misdemeanor for breach of peace AND 2.

Force is necessary to prevent commission of the crime or to effectuate the arrest

Elements of self defense: 1. Threatened with an imminent threat of unlawful force; 2. 3. Force used was proportionate to the threatened force.

Force used was necessary to repel the threat;

Elements of self defense: 1. Threatened with an imminent threat of unlawful force; 2. Force used was necessary to repel the threat; 3.

Force used was proportionate to the threatened force.

Larceny elements: 1. Trespassory "taking" and "carrying away" (asportation, some amount of movement suffices) of personal property 2. 3. With the intent to permanently deprive the owner of it

From the possession of another

Elements of necessity: a def may claim this as a defense 1. 2. D seeking to avoid clear & imminent danger. 3. Causal connection: reasonable for D to believe his illegal conduct would abate the harm. 4. No effective legal alternative. 5. Legislature has not spoken on issue. 6. D not at fault in creating situation.

Harm avoided greater than harm caused.

Actus Reus elements: 1. Conduct- voluntary act unless omission is sufficient for liability 2. Causation 3.

Harmful result

what is the CL/Minority duty to retreat rule?

If defendant knew that he could have safely retreated and didn't, jury can consider that in determining whether he was justified in using deadly force. If you couldve retreated with complete safety, using deadly force is not necessary

Steps for determining what type of homicide it is: Step 1: Step 2: Consider whether it can be bumped up to 1st degree murder, which requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation. Or bumped down to voluntary manslaughter

If intentional killing, start with 2nd degree murder

two rules of thumb in figuring out whether offense is strict liability when no mens rea is listed: 1. If purpose of law is more punishment of wrongdoer than regulation of social order, mens rea is required. 2.

If penalty is light (fine and no prison), no mens rea requirement.

two rules of thumb in figuring out whether offense is strict liability when no mens rea is listed: 1. 2. If penalty is light (fine and no prison), no mens rea requirement.

If purpose of law is more punishment of wrongdoer than regulation of social order, mens rea is required.

Under MPC, a person acts purposely with respect to a material element of an offense when: 1. If the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and 2.

If the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist

Under MPC, a person acts purposely with respect to a material element of an offense when: 1. 2. If the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist

If the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result

For minority rule defense of others, you could only have defense of others if you: 1. Were correct about the need to use force Ex. That the person you are defending would have been justified in using force (Act-at-Peril rule) AND 2.

If you were in a special status relationship with the person being protected Ex. Wouldn't have the defense if you were protecting a complete stranger

The 2 exceptions to the CL/MPC general rule of mistake of law: 1. a person reasonably relies on an official interpretation of the law that turns out to be erroneous (entrapment by estoppel) 2.

Ignorance can be a defense if knowledge that the prohibited conduct is unlawful is an element of the crime. (Lack of knowledge negates the mens rea.) general rule ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Under Voluntary Manslaughter's categorical test, there are 5 situations: 1. Aggravated assault or battery 2. Observation of a serious crime against a close relative 3. 4. Mutual combat 5. Catching one's wife in the act of adultery

Illegal arrest (when people would do citizens arrest)

when it is so within his reach, inspection, observation or control, that he could, if not overcome by violence or prevented by fear, retain his poss of it in the context of robbery

Immediate presence

Duress elements: 1. 2. Well grounded fear that threat will be carried out 3. No reasonable opportunity to escape

Immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm

4 diff mental states that can constitute malice aforethought (4 ways of getting to a murder charge under the common law): 1. Intent to kill, including knowledge that death was substantially certain 2. 3. Depraved heart murder- extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk 4. felony murder rule- strict liability for the homicide committed during commission of felony (don't have to have mens rea. Only need intent to commit the felony and then a killing that occurs during the death)

Intent or knowledge of serious (or grievous) bodily harm

conspiracy is a two-fold specific intent crime: 1. Intent to combine with others AND 2.

Intent to accomplish the illegal objective

conspiracy is a two-fold specific intent crime: 1. 2. Intent to accomplish the illegal objective

Intent to combine with others

Unlawful killing of human being is committed with malice aforethought and constitutes murder when any one of four conditions are present: 1. Intent to kill 2. 3. Abandoned and malignant heart or depraved heart OR 4. Felony murder rule applies

Intent to commit serious bodily injury

Unlawful killing of human being is committed with malice aforethought and constitutes murder when any one of four conditions are present: 1. 2. Intent to commit serious bodily injury 3. Abandoned and malignant heart or depraved heart OR 4. Felony murder rule applies

Intent to kill

4 diff mental states that can constitute malice aforethought (4 ways of getting to a murder charge under the common law): 1. 2. Intent or knowledge of serious (or grievous) bodily harm 3. Depraved heart murder- extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk 4. felony murder rule- strict liability for the homicide committed during commission of felony (don't have to have mens rea. Only need intent to commit the felony and then a killing that occurs during the death)

Intent to kill, including knowledge that death was substantially certain

Special Intent: categories 1. 2. Proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause humiliation) 3. Proof of actor's awareness of an attendant circumstance (intent to sell obscene literature to a person known to be under the age of 18).

Intention by the actor to commit some future act, separate from the actus reus (possession with intent to sell).

Embezzlement elements: 1. 2. Property of another 3. By someone who is already in lawful possession of it

Intentional conversion of

robbery elements: 1. 2. Force or threat of force to 3. Take and carry away the prop of another from his person or in his presence

Intentionally using

Why punish for those who attempt (incomplete defense) to commit a crime? 1. 2. Prevention 3. Would shock the conscience NOT to punish based on defendant's good luck in the crime not being completed.

Intervention

Ordinary recklessness (awareness of a substantial and unjustifiable risk) or criminal negligence (failing to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and such failure constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation) This is often called "gross negligence" but it differs from recklessness because there is not an awareness of the risk.

Involuntary manslaughter

This is often called "gross negligence" but it differs from recklessness because there is not an awareness of the risk.

Involuntary manslaughter CL

If due to a diseased mind, a person abstractly knows that a given act is wrong, but yet by an insane impulse, he is irresistibly driven to commit it, he has an insanity defense. what insanity test is this?

Irresistible Impulse or Control Test volitional test

At his trial for first degree murder in the killing of his girlfriend, Jeff claimed that he heard voices from God at the time directing Jeff to kill his girlfriend to prevent the world from coming to an end. While he did not want to kill her and knew that it would be illegal, Jeff believed the voices in his head and thought that Armageddon would result if he did not kill her. Which tests would Jeff be acquitted? What are Jeff's best chances of being acquitted based on the tests?

Irresistible impulse test bc of the volitional impairment and MPC

what is MPC duress

It is an affirmative defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was coerced to do so by the use of, or a threat to use, unlawful force against his person or the person of another, that a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist.

Theft crimes: 1. 2. Embezzlement 3. False pretenses

Larceny (catch all)

Elements of necessity: 1. Harm avoided greater than harm caused. 2. D seeking to avoid clear & imminent danger. 3. Causal connection: reasonable for D to believe his illegal conduct would abate the harm. 4. No effective legal alternative. 5. 6. D not at fault in creating situation.

Legislature has not spoken on issue.

Using the dangerous proximity test: Lighting a match with intent to set fire to haystack but blowing it out on seeing that he was watched. does this pass the test?

Lighting a match with intent to set fire to a haystack but blowing the match out. Court says yes, this is dangerous proximity test is met bc it wouldn't take much at all for him to have lit the haystack on fire

Majority rule for defense of others: justification defense when the D uses force against another person to defend a 3rd person that D reasonably believes is in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Like self defense, _______________, _______________ and ______________ are required

Like self defense, imminence, necessity and proportionality are required

Under the __________________, to establish a defense for insanity it must be shown that: Accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong.

M'Naghten rule its a cognitive test

A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if: with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he (i) solicits such other person to commit it; or (ii) aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing it; or (iii) having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the offense, fails to make proper effort to do so is this MPC or CL for accomplice liability

MPC

Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense. this mistake of fact is for CL or MPC?

MPC

Is this mens rea CL or MPC? purposely, knowingly, recklessly, negligently

MPC

MPC Unintentional Manslaughter: Homicide committed recklessly but not recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, because that would be murder under ____________

MPC

Under (MPC/CL), voluntary intoxication is a defense if it negates an element of the offense.

MPC

when grading criminal attempts, which one looks at how many steps you've taken? MPC or CL

MPC

Donald has a mental illness that results in delusional thoughts and images. One day he stabs his roommate, Tim, in the face believing that Tim's head was a pumpkin and he was carving the pumpkin into a jack-o-lantern. Under which test(s) might he be acquitted?

MPC and M'Naghten rule bc of the cognitive impairment

Under mistake of fact doctrine, in (CL/MPC), you just have to look at what mens rea was required in the statute and what the person's mistake was

MPC mistake of fact is a defense if it negates the mental state required for commission of the offense

____________doesn't see any distinction between general/specific intent so you don't have to figure out if the crime was general or specific intent

MPC ...MPC is more simplified

1. purposely does something which is an act constituting a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime. 2. conduct that may be held substantial: not a substantial step unless the conduct is "strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose." -Non-exhaustive list of conduct which, if strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose, shall not be held insufficient as a matter of law. (ex. Lying and waiting, searching for someone, following someone)

MPC Substantial Step Test

Homicide committed recklessly but not recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, because that would be murder under MPC. name that homicide

MPC Unintentional Manslaughter

The 3 approaches to voluntary manslaughter: 1. Early common law categorical test 2. Modern reasonable person test 3.

MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED)

It is an affirmative defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was coerced to do so by the use of, or a threat to use, unlawful force against his person or the person of another, that a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist. This is the (CL/MPC) for __________

MPC for duress

If mistake about need to use force was reckless or negligent, then the defendant will be convicted of reckless or negligent homicide, respectively, rather than murder

MPC imperfect self defense A partial mitigation that doesn't get you completely mitigated

Homicide that would otherwise be murder is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is reasonable explanation or excuse. [Reasonableness determined from viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under circumstances as he believes them to be] name that homicide

MPC intentional manslaughter

what is the difference between CL and MPC conspiracy in regard to the Pinkerton Rule

MPC rejects the Pinkerton Rule. CL does not reject the rule

1. murder 2. manslaughter 3. negligent homicide what are these 3 homicides?

MPC's unintentional homicides

___________ looks at how many steps you've taken whereas __________ focuses on how many steps are left to take

MPC; CL

Elements of accomplice liability: 1. 2. Actus reus: solicitation of the offense, active assistance in the commission of the crime, encouragement of the offense. 3. Causation not an issue in the sense that it doesn't matter if the principal would have committed the crime without the accomplice's help.

Mens rea of an accomplice: dual intent—intent to aid the principal party and intent that the principal commit that crime.

What MPC doctrine is this? Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense.

Mistake of Fact

The 3 approaches to voluntary manslaughter: 1. Early common law categorical test 2. 3. MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED)

Modern reasonable person test

Homicide committed purposely or knowingly. You don't have degrees (1st and 2nd) and premeditation and deliberation does not matter.

Murder under MPC

Under Voluntary Manslaughter's categorical test, there are 5 situations: 1. Aggravated assault or battery 2. Observation of a serious crime against a close relative 3. Illegal arrest (when people would do citizens arrest) 4. 5. Catching one's wife in the act of adultery

Mutual combat

Necessity and defense cant be used as a defense to murder under __________ but can be used as a defense to murder under ___________

Necessity and defense cant be used as a defense to murder under CL but can be used as a defense to murder under MPC

_____________ and defense cant be used as a defense to murder under CL but can be used as a defense to murder under MPC

Necessity and defense cant be used as a defense to murder under CL but can be used as a defense to murder under MPC

Can you use deadly force if trying to protect prop (money or car or home)?

No We put life over things

Elements of necessity: 1. Harm avoided greater than harm caused. 2. D seeking to avoid clear & imminent danger. 3. Causal connection: reasonable for D to believe his illegal conduct would abate the harm. 4. 5. Legislature has not spoken on issue. 6. D not at fault in creating situation.

No effective legal alternative.

Can infer intent from knowledge in the context of conspiracy when 1. Supplier has acquired a stake in the venture. 2. 3. Volume of business with buyer is grossly disproportionate to any legitimate demand or the sales to the buyer constitute a high proportion of the seller's total business.

No legitimate use for goods or services.

Duress elements: 1. Immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm 2. Well grounded fear that threat will be carried out 3.

No reasonable opportunity to escape

A person causes a death when committing the felony. Do they have to show mens rea for this murder?

No, it could be a complete accident felony murder rule

Can you have deliberation without premeditation?

No, You can have premeditation without deliberation but you cannot deliberate without premeditating.

A man walks in on his wife having sex with another man. In a rage, he gets his gun from the dresser and shoots and kills her. While he is guilty of voluntary manslaughter which is a felony, can we charge him with felony murder?

No, because of merger doctrine. If underlying felony is "assaultive" in nature, it mergers with the homicide and cannot be the basis of a felony murder instruction. this is the merger doctrine which is the 3rd limitation under felony murder rule shooting your wife in the head with a shot gun will result in a threat of immediate violent injury

is good faith is a legal defense to first degree murder?

No, good faith is not a legal defense to first degree murder Ex. Def said he wanted to end his wife's suffering. So he shot her in the head. Then left then came back and shot her again. He just wanted to terminate her suffering and knew she wouldn't die happy in a nursing home and that the hospital couldn't help her either. Doctor said Emily couldve lived for 5-10 years. Def's good faith intentions don't come in to play here

If one takes personal property in the reasonable and good faith belief that the property has been abandoned or discarded by the true owner, is he guilty of theft?

No, he is not guilty of theft

If you just sit there and do nothing, is this enough to be considered as an accomplice?

No, if you just sit there and do nothing, that's not enough to be considered as an accomplice. You must do something.

is Medical insanity the same thing as legal insanity?

No, medical insanity does not equal legal insanity Mental illness is a med concept whereas legal insanity is a legal term You can be mentally ill but not legally insane You cant be legally insane unless you're mentally ill Mental ill must be there, its preliminary

for MPC duress, is there an explicit imminence requirement here?

No, no explicit imminence requirement here

D-driver negligently strikes V, a pedestrian, on a public road, leaving V unconscious in a pool of blood. Five minutes later, an escaped tiger from the nearby community zoo, lumbers down the road, discovers V, and eats V for lunch. Is D the proximate cause of V's death?

No, this is a coincidental intervening cause. what's the likelihood that a tiger just comes out of nowhere. D wouldn't be prox cause bc its unforeseeable about the tiger

Do you have an obligation to sit up and oppose the crime as an accomplice?

No, you don't have an obligation to sit up and oppose the crime, the law will never encourage you to put yourself in danger by opposing the criminal behavior

one who participates in a felony as a feigned accomplice, in order to entrap the other, are they criminally liable?

No. one who participates in a felony as a feigned accomplice, in order to entrap the other, is not criminally liable. Ex. Plaintiff assisted (actus reus) with pierce in committing the burglary but he shouldn't be found liable bc he didn't have the means rea requirement (bc he always planned on stopping Pierce from committing the full crime. He was always planning on trapping Pierce bc he called the cops on Pierce so they could catch Pierce) If the accomplice doesnt have the intent to see the eventual crime committed, then they shouldn't be found guilty as an accomplice

Why do we excuse infants (minors)?

Not morally culpable and they cant distinguish from right or wrong of the criminal intent

Under Voluntary Manslaughter's categorical test, there are 5 situations: 1. Aggravated assault or battery 2. 3. Illegal arrest (when people would do citizens arrest) 4. Mutual combat 5. Catching one's wife in the act of adultery

Observation of a serious crime against a close relative

burglary elements: 1. Entry 2. 3. With the knowledge that the entry is not licensed AND 4. With the intent to commit a crime within the structure

Of a structure

Define the word, intent: 1. 2. One intends a particular social harm if one knows to a virtual certainty that one's actions will cause that social harm.

One acts with the requisite intent if it is the conscious object or purpose to cause a certain result or to engage in certain prohibited conduct.

The following is 5 categories where you are obligated to step in and help or else you may be criminally liable: 1. Statute imposes a duty 2. Certain status relationship with another 3. Assumed a contractual duty of care for another 4. 5. Person creates a risk of harm to another

One has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid When def voluntarily assumes care of a person in need of help

Define the word, intent: 1. One acts with the requisite intent if it is the conscious object or purpose to cause a certain result or to engage in certain prohibited conduct. 2.

One intends a particular social harm if one knows to a virtual certainty that one's actions will cause that social harm.

Involuntary manslaughter CL: ______________________ or criminal negligence

Ordinary recklessness

what are examples of a special status relationship with another?

Parent/child, teacher/student, employer/employee, prison guard/prisoner. Anytime where someone is in the custodial care of someone else

The following is 5 categories where you are obligated to step in and help or else you may be criminally liable: 1. Statute imposes a duty 2. Certain status relationship with another 3. Assumed a contractual duty of care for another 4. One has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid 5.

Person creates a risk of harm to another When def creates the risk of harm to the victim

Killing was proximately caused by an act, the natural consequences of which are dangerous to life, which act was deliberately performed by a person who knows that his conduct endangers the life of another and who acts with conscious disregard for human life

Phillips test

Conspirator can be liable for crime committed by another member of the conspiracy even if that other crime was not part of the original agreement as long as unintended crime was: (1) in furtherance of the conspiracy; (2) within the scope of the conspiracy; or (3) reasonably foreseeable consequence of the original agreement. what doctrine is this

Pinkerton Rule

Why punish for those who attempt (incomplete defense) to commit a crime? 1. Intervention 2. 3. Would shock the conscience NOT to punish based on defendant's good luck in the crime not being completed.

Prevention

Special Intent: categories 1. Intention by the actor to commit some future act, separate from the actus reus (possession with intent to sell). 2. 3. Proof of actor's awareness of an attendant circumstance (intent to sell obscene literature to a person known to be under the age of 18).

Proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause humiliation)

Special Intent: categories 1. Intention by the actor to commit some future act, separate from the actus reus (possession with intent to sell). 2. Proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause humiliation) 3.

Proof of actor's awareness of an attendant circumstance (intent to sell obscene literature to a person known to be under the age of 18).

Embezzlement elements: 1. Intentional conversion of 2. 3. By someone who is already in lawful possession of it

Property of another

voluntary manslaughter's modern reasonable person test: 1. D acted in a heat of passion; 2. 3. D did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing; 4. A reasonable person in the D's shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool; and 5. Causal connection between provocation, passion, and the killing

Provocation was one of the five things from the categorical test.

in MPC manslaughter, how is reasonableness determined?

Reasonableness determined from viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under circumstances as he believes them to be

_________________ is not voluntary if it is motivated in whole or in part by circumstances which increase the probability of detection or which make it more difficult to accomplish the criminal purpose.

Renunciation We will incentivize criminals to give it up voluntary. If we didn't allow them to have this defense, then once they start, they wouldn't stop bc they will still be in trouble. So we have this defense to encourage criminals to give up committing their crime completely Any signs of abandonment, ask that in a separate question

what does plantiff must show for wilfull blindness that defendant did

Requires a showing that the defendant (1) subjectively believed there was a high probability that a fact existed (e.g., that drugs were in the car) and (2) took deliberate actions to avoid learning that fact.

Medical care. Gonna be medical care where we see something that happens that then causes/contributes to victim's death what kind of intervening cause is this

Responsive (dependent) intervening cause:

we will punish you bc you deserve to be punished. actions are right or wrong, regardless of their consequences. Looking backward

Retributivism/non-consequentialist

1. Burglar breaking and entering a residence at night with intent to commit an assault on resident of home. 2. Burglar breaking and entering a residence at night with intent to steal. Does scenario 1 and 2 apply to the merger doctrine and thus does the felony murder apply to one of them or both?

Scenario 1 is where the burglar has an intent to commit an assault on the resident of the home. Since the underlying felony is "assaultive" in nature, it merges with the homicide and cannot be the basis of a felony murder instruction. Scenario 2 is where the burglar doesn't have the intent to commit an assault and instead has an independent felonious purpose. So, this felony will not merge with the homicide and cannot be a basis of felony murder

How do you know you have a causation issue at all?

Someone doesn't die immediately and something else happens in between def's conduct and the victim dying -Homicide -So you look at "but for" causation first. If not for the def's conduct, would the victim had died if they did? -These have right and wrong answers (don't have to argue both ways)

Is this general or specific intent: Common law burglary: "Breaking and entering the dwelling house of another at night with the intent to commit a felony therein."

Special intent, #1 1. Intention by the actor to commit some future act, separate from the actus reus (possession with intent to sell). 2. Proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause humiliation) 3. Proof of actor's awareness of an attendant circumstance (intent to sell obscene literature to a person known to be under the age of 18).

The following is 5 categories where you are obligated to step in and help or else you may be criminally liable: 1. 2. Certain status relationship with another 3. Assumed a contractual duty of care for another 4. One has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid 5. Person creates a risk of harm to another

Statute imposes a duty ex. duty to pay taxes to IRS

Both police and private citizens can use non-deadly force (running/tackling someone) if they have a reasonable belief that: 1. 2. Force is necessary to prevent commission of the crime or to effectuate the arrest

Such other person is committing or has committed a felony or a misdemeanor for breach of peace

Can infer intent from knowledge in the context of conspiracy when 1. 2. No legitimate use for goods or services. 3. Volume of business with buyer is grossly disproportionate to any legitimate demand or the sales to the buyer constitute a high proportion of the seller's total business.

Supplier has acquired a stake in the venture.

robbery elements: 1. Intentionally using 2. Force or threat of force to 3.

Take and carry away the prop of another from his person or in his presence

Felony murder rule: res gestae: 1. 2. Causal connection between felony and homicide. some court say as long as there's a but for connection, that's all that matters even if it seems unlikely that the killing occurred from your actions Other courts (like the weed plane crash) will be looking for more, will be looking for more of a direct connection.

Temporal: felony and homicide must be close in time and geographical proximity (continues until D reaches a place of temporary safety). Until you've reached a place of temporary safety, the felony is still ongoing. So if you kill someone in that escape, felony murder rule can apply

Under the felony murder rule, when interpreting if an unenumerated felony is inherently dangerous (one of the 3 limitations)

The felony that by its very nature cannot be committed without creating a substantial risk that someone will be killed

what is the difference between CL's self defense and MPC's self defense?

The word "reasonably" is what is missing in MPC whereas in CL, there is the use of the word "reasonably" to indicate objective. MPC focuses on subjective belief and CL focuses on objective belief

Elements of self defense: 1. 2. Force used was necessary to repel the threat; 3. Force used was proportionate to the threatened force.

Threatened with an imminent threat of unlawful force;

False Pretenses elements: 1. False statement of fact that 2. Causes the victim 3. 4. Def knew statement was false AND 5. Def intended to defraud the victim

To pass title to the def

Larceny elements: 1. 2. From the possession of another 3. With the intent to permanently deprive the owner of it

Trespassory "taking" and "carrying away" (asportation, some amount of movement suffices) of personal property

True or False Having the opportunity to deliberate is not evidence that the def did deliberate

True deliberation is needed for 1st degree murder

Under the infancy doctrine the general rule is: under ________ years old, no criminal capacity. ___________ years or older, fully responsible. Age range of ___________ years is a rebuttable presumption of no criminal capacity.

Under 7, no criminal capacity. 14 or older, fully responsible. 7-14 is rebuttable presumption of no criminal capacity.

Under MPC legal wrong doctrine: Statute 1: promoting prostitution in the first degree (that he was convicted of): it is illegal to induce a person under 16 years of age to engage in prostitution. Statute 2 (footnote 5 on p. 259) promoting prostitution in the third degree if he induces or causes a person 16 years of age or older to engage in prostitution. Because D induced someone under 16, even if he reasonably believed she was 16 or older, under the MPC, can D be guilty of the first degree (higher) crime?

Under MPC 2.04(2)? Although ignorance or mistake would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the D would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the D shall reduce the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be convicted to those of the offense of which he would have been guilty had the situation been as he supposed. You can only be found guilty under statute 2. MPC says they'll look at it thru def's eyes and says its still a crime, so were going to charge you with that specific crime. Not with the higher crime (like common law does)

Under (MPC/CL), mistake of fact (as long as you can prove it), will be easier than the (MPC/CL) bc you don't have to figure out if it's a general or specific intent crime

Under MPC, mistake of fact (as long as you can prove it), will be easier than the common law bc you don't have to figure out if it's a general or specific intent crime

It is as though a movie, which has so far depicted merely the accused person's acts without stating his intention, had suddenly stopped, and the audience is asked to say what the person planned to do. If there is only one reasonable answer to this question, then the accused has done what amounts to an attempt. If there is more than one reasonably possible answer, then the accused has not yet done enough. what test is being described here?

Unequivocality Test (common law)

Think about it: don't know def's intent. Saw def's actions but then turn off the movie and say, what do you think this guy is doing? If your answer is yes he is committing a crime, then the _________________ test is met

Unequivocality Test (common law)

When conduct alone unambiguously manifests criminal intent (without actually knowing intent).

Unequivocality Test (common law)

[ordinary] recklessness name that homicide

Unintentional MPC manslaughter

Can infer intent from knowledge in the context of conspiracy when 1. Supplier has acquired a stake in the venture. 2. No legitimate use for goods or services. 3.

Volume of business with buyer is grossly disproportionate to any legitimate demand or the sales to the buyer constitute a high proportion of the seller's total business.

An intentional homicide, done in a sudden heat of passion, caused by adequate provocation, before there has been a reasonable opportunity to cool.

Voluntary Manslaughter under common law intentional

Duress elements: 1. Immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm 2. 3. No reasonable opportunity to escape

Well grounded fear that threat will be carried out

For minority rule defense of others, you could only have defense of others if you: 1. 2. If you were in a special status relationship with the person being protected Ex. Wouldn't have the defense if you were protecting a complete stranger

Were correct about the need to use force Ex. That the person you are defending would have been justified in using force (Act-at-Peril rule) AND

what is knowledge under MPC? (MPC follows willfull blindness)

When knowledge of the existence of a particular fact is an element of an offense, such knowledge is established if a person is aware of a high probability of its existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist.

Necessity under MPC (1) Conduct that the actor believes to be necessary to avoid a harm or evil to himself or to another is justifiable, provided that: (a) The harm or evil sought to be avoided by such conduct is greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged; . . . (2)

When the actor was reckless or negligent in bringing about the situation requiring a choice of harms or evils or in appraising the necessity for his conduct, the justification afforded by this Section is unavailable in a prosecution for any offense for which recklessness or negligence suffices to establish culpability.

There are 4 types of situations where involuntary intoxication might come up: 1. Where intoxication was caused by the fault of another (force, duress, fraud) 2. Where intoxication was caused by innocent mistake (took a hallucinogenic pill believing it to be aspirin) 3. 4. Where unexpected intoxication results from a medically prescribed drug

Where D unknowingly suffers from a physiological or psychological condition that renders him abnormally susceptible to a legal intoxicant ("Pathological intoxication")

There are 4 types of situations where involuntary intoxication might come up: 1. Where intoxication was caused by the fault of another (force, duress, fraud) 2. 3. Where D unknowingly suffers from a physiological or psychological condition that renders him abnormally susceptible to a legal intoxicant ("Pathological intoxication") 4. Where unexpected intoxication results from a medically prescribed drug

Where intoxication was caused by innocent mistake (took a hallucinogenic pill believing it to be aspirin)

There are 4 types of situations where involuntary intoxication might come up: 1. 2. Where intoxication was caused by innocent mistake (took a hallucinogenic pill believing it to be aspirin) 3. Where D unknowingly suffers from a physiological or psychological condition that renders him abnormally susceptible to a legal intoxicant ("Pathological intoxication") 4. Where unexpected intoxication results from a medically prescribed drug

Where intoxication was caused by the fault of another (force, duress, fraud)

There are 4 types of situations where involuntary intoxication might come up: 1. Where intoxication was caused by the fault of another (force, duress, fraud) 2. Where intoxication was caused by innocent mistake (took a hallucinogenic pill believing it to be aspirin) 3. Where D unknowingly suffers from a physiological or psychological condition that renders him abnormally susceptible to a legal intoxicant ("Pathological intoxication") 4.

Where unexpected intoxication results from a medically prescribed drug

burglary elements: 1. Entry 2. Of a structure 3. With the knowledge that the entry is not licensed AND 4.

With the intent to commit a crime within the structure

Larceny elements: 1. Trespassory "taking" and "carrying away" (asportation, some amount of movement suffices) of personal property 2. From the possession of another 3.

With the intent to permanently deprive the owner of it

burglary elements: 1. Entry 2. Of a structure 3. 4. With the intent to commit a crime within the structure

With the knowledge that the entry is not licensed

A person is guilty of rape if he: 1. Engages in vaginal intercourse with another person 2. By force or threat of force 3. Against the will 4.

Without the consent of the other person

Why punish for those who attempt (incomplete defense) to commit a crime? 1. Intervention 2. Prevention 3.

Would shock the conscience NOT to punish based on defendant's good luck in the crime not being completed.

X intentionally stabs V in the chest. V will die from loss of blood in 15 minutes. Simultaneously, D intentionally shoots V in the leg. V would not die from this wound by itself. V dies in 10 minutes. who is liable

X and D

X intentionally stabs V in the chest. V will die from loss of blood in 15 minutes. Simultaneously, D unintentionally shoots V in the leg. V would not die from this wound by itself. V dies in 10 minutes. who is liable

X and D

X shoots V in the heart. Simultaneously, D shoots V in the head. V would die instantly from either wound. V dies instantly. who is liable

X and D

X stabs V. Simultaneously, D stabs V. Neither wound by itself would kill V. V dies from loss of blood from the two wounds. who is liable

X and D

Under entrapment by estoppel, if someone relied on advice from government military officials to pass military weapons, did they commit a crime? Does that person have a valid defense?

Yes, defense is valid. They are government officials exam review

Does transferred intent apply to both common law and MPC and what are its limitations?

Yes, it applies to both. • Limitations: cannot use it for different categories of crimes (intending to destroy property cannot be transferred to intending to kill someone). Should not be used to charge for two crimes from one bullet and one death. (so if def intends to shoot someone and it misses and shoots someone else instead and kills them, this is one intentional killing One bullet and one death should be one crime charged. They shouldn't be liable for 2 victims in this hypo

Is it possible that you can be liable for both accomplice and conspiracy?

Yes, its possible you did both. Then you could be found guilty of the conspiracy and accomplice

X and V steal property from D's riverfront home. The thieves flee in a boat. D fires two shots at the boat, seeking (unlawfully) to scare the thieves. X, fearful of another shot, dives into the water, causing the boat to capsize. V drowns.

Yes, responsive intervening cause. It was foreseeable. D was prox cause of victim's death

Can a shooter can be held criminally liable for intentionally killing the other person even if that other person was in fact an unintended victim?

Yes, under transferred intent which applies to both CL and MPC

You cannot conspire to agree with an unintentional murder. You're either agreeing to commit murder or scaring people but you're not trying to kill anyone

You cannot attempt to commit an unintentional act. That makes no sense

MPC approach to Actus Reus (1) ___________________________________________ (2) the following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section: A reflex or convulsion; A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

a person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct that includes a voluntary act

The 2 exceptions to the CL/MPC general rule of mistake of law: 1. 2. Ignorance can be a defense if knowledge that the prohibited conduct is unlawful is an element of the crime. (Lack of knowledge negates the mens rea.)

a person reasonably relies on an official interpretation of the law that turns out to be erroneous (entrapment by estoppel) general rule: ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Under felony murder rule's temporal requirement, the crime is still occurring until you've reached ____________________.

a temporary place of safety

You attempt to pick pocket someone and it turns out they arent carrying a wallet in their pocket. You can still be charged for attempted theft even though it was impossible for you to complete. Not a defense bc what you were trying to do was a crime a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

a) factual impossibility

intention is to commit a crime but cannot finish because of some circumstance unknown to her or beyond her control. NOT a defense. a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

a) factual impossibility

Affirmative defense to abandon his effort to commit the crime or prevent its commission, "under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of his criminal purpose."

abandonment in the context of attempt

if the defendant's conduct ____________ the death, even slightly, the defendant is said to be a but-for cause of the death.

accelerates

Help with crime = __________

accomplice

Both __________ and ____________ involve more than one defendant.

accomplice and conspiracy

general rule: For ________________ you need some affirmative conduct in the form of acts or words from which reasonable inferences can be drawn of a common design or purpose to effect the commission of the crime. Mere presence not enough.

accomplice liability exception to this rule: failure to object when one has a duty to oppose it, such as in a special relationship.

failure to act can be enough for liability Ex. failure to have proper fire exits or fire safe building)

act ommission

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the __________ situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

actor's

Under causation, need both _____________________ and proximate cause. This is only an issue in result crimes (often homicide).

actual (but-for) cause

But for the defendant's voluntary acts, would the social harm have occurred when it did? If no, then D is the _______________________ of the result.

actual cause

A voluntary act/conduct that causes a harmful result

actus reus

MPC approach to _____________. (1) a person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct that includes a voluntary act (2) the following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section: A reflex or convulsion; A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

actus reus

encompasses the physical part of the crime

actus reus

causation is part of the (actus reus/mens rea) of the crime

actus reus remember, actus reus elements: 1. Conduct- voluntary act unless omission is sufficient for liability 2. Causation 3. Harmful result

You need to be able to analyze under both the unequivocality and dangerous proximity test for ____________

actus reus. Bc Actus reus is so unpredictable bc depending on what test you use, you can come out with diff results

Official interpretation defense (mistake of law) under the MPC: A belief that conduct does not legally constitute an offense is a defense to a prosecution for that offense based upon such conduct when he acts in 1. reasonable reliance 2. upon an official statement of the law, 3. 4. contained in a statute or other enactment.

afterward determined to be invalid or erroneous,

Intent of supplier who knows of illegal use of their goods/services may be established by: (1) direct evidence that he intends to participate; or (2) through an inference that he intends to participate based on (a) his special interest in activity (3 examples on prior slide), or (b)

aggravated nature of crime itself.

If someone threatens to punch you and you punch them. The person who threatened you is the _____________

aggressor

MPC Accomplice liability A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if: with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he (i) solicits such other person to commit it; or (ii) (iii) having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the offense, fails to make proper effort to do so

aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing it

Even though D's breaking the law didn't avoid a greater harm, the D shouldn't be punished bc he is not morally culpable what is this?

an excuse defense

Assume D recklessly drives her car and hits a pedestrian V who is walking on the side of the road. V is knocked unconscious but not dead. Assume two different scenarios after: 1. Someone calls 911, ambulance arrives, and in taking V to hospital, ambulance gets into an accident and V dies. Responsive or coincidental? 2. After D hits V, another car drives by, doesn't see V because the road is dark, and hits V again, killing V. responsive or coincidental?

answer 1. responsive 2. coincidental. Cuts off liability if its unforeseeable

There are 5 enumerated felonies: rape, robbery, __________, burglary, and kidnapping

arson

If underlying felony is _____________ in nature, merges with the homicide and cannot be the basis of a felony murder instruction.

assaultive this is the merger doctrine which is the 3rd limitation under felony murder rule

_________________________ is any felony that involves a threat of immediate violent injury. shooting your wife in the head with a shot gun will result in a threat of immediate violent injury

assaultive felony Under felony murder rule's merger doctrine which is the 3rd limitation, if underlying felony is "assaultive" in nature, merges with the homicide and cannot be the basis of a felony murder instruction.

Under mens rea, _________ crimes have two intents: 1. intent to commit the acts that constitute the actus reus of attempt and 2. intent to commit the completed act (i.e., murder).

attempt

what is an incomplete offense?

attempt

you point the gun and pull trigger but you miss. This is a completed _________ since you actually attempted but you failed

attempt

Anytime there's _______________________, jury must be instructed that the criminal had the intent to kill.

attempted murder

The idea of ____________________ is that you're trying for that person to be dead, no reckless is involved under attempted murder

attempted murder

Under MPC approach to mens rea, each material element of offense has to be proven with some specified mental state. Material elements such as: 1) nature of forbidden conduct; 2) 3) result of conduct.

attendant circumstances;

If your goal (conduct you're trying to do) does not violate any law a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

b) pure legal impossibility

law does not prohibit the conduct or the result that defendant sought to achieve. IS a defense. a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

b) pure legal impossibility

explains the cycle of violence that abusive relationships go thru (escalation, tension, emotional abuse, hostility, explosion) They stay bc they think they're incapable of leaving and getting out of the relationship

battered woman syndrome

MPC Mistake of Fact: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the purpose, knowledge, ___________, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense.

belief

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he ____________ them to be.

believes

For ____________, def must have actually entered within 4 walls or beneath the roof

burglary

Defendant buys a cheap used refrigerator falsely believing it was stolen. a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

c) hybrid legal impossibility

Offers a bribe to a "juror" who is not a juror. a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

c) hybrid legal impossibility

Shoots a corpse believing that it is a live human being. a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

c) hybrid legal impossibility

Tries to hunt a deer out of season by shooting a stuffed animal. a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

c) hybrid legal impossibility

goal was illegal but commission of offense was impossible due to a factual mistake about the legal status of an attendant circumstance. Was a defense under common law, but MPC rejects and 37 states have followed. Not a defense a) factual impossibility b) pure legal impossibility c) hybrid legal impossibility

c) hybrid legal impossibility

is murder intentional or unintentional?

can be intentional or unintentional. can be both

Effectuation of arrest or apprehending the felon by private citizen: what is the rule?

can only use deadly force to apprehend a felon reasonably believed to have committed a forcible or atrocious felony

Regarding deadly force for felonies when it comes to preventing crime, what is the majority rule?

can only use deadly force to prevent commission of forcible or atrocious felonies

Regarding deadly force for felonies when it comes to preventing crime, what is the minority rule?

can use deadly force to prevent commission of any felony (even if non-violent)

what is the general rule regarding duress for homicide?

cannot have a duress defense for killing someone

What is the general rule on protecting your property?

cannot use deadly force solely for the protection of the prop. The preservation of human life and limb from grievous harm is of more importance to society than the protection of property

Under the _______________ in jurisdictions that still follow duty to retreat rule, it does not apply if attacked in home

castle doctrine

Under _______________ test, mere words are usually not enough to constitute legally adequate provocation.

categorical

Actus Reus elements: 1. Conduct- voluntary act unless omission is sufficient for liability 2. 3. Harmful result

causation

Under _____________, need both actual (but-for) cause and proximate cause. This is only an issue in result crimes (often homicide).

causation

________________ connects voluntary act with the social harm

causation

________________ is only an issue in result crimes (often homicide)

causation but-for test

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the ___________ known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

circumstances

MPC for duress: It is an affirmative defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was ______________ to do so by the use of, or a threat to use, unlawful force against his person or the person of another, that a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist.

coerced

unable to understand right from wrong is the ___________ test

cognitive

A ______________ intervening cause is one that is independent to the def's voluntary act

coincidental (independent)

Felony murder is a death that occurs during the ____________ of certain felonies, subject to inherently dangerous felony rule and merger doctrine.

commission

(common law/MPC) intent encompasses both conscious purpose or object AND knowledge that the harm is virtually certain to result.

common law

If the mistake about the need to use deadly force is unreasonable, many states recognize a __________________________, which mitigates murder down to manslaughter.

common law imperfect self defense

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his __________. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

conduct

MPC Substantial Step Test 1. purposely does something which is an act constituting a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime. 2. -Non-exhaustive list of conduct which, if strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose, shall not be held insufficient as a matter of law. (ex. Lying and waiting, searching for someone, following someone)

conduct that may be held substantial: not a substantial step unless the conduct is "strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose."

In a ____________________, prosecutor must prove that there were statements by the victim which were clearly communicated to the defendant and which expressly and unequivocally indicated the victim's withdrawal of any prior consent and lack of consent at that time.

consensual relationship

Agree to crime ahead of time but don't help = _____________

conspiracy

__________ does NOT merge with substantive offense under common law but DOES merge under MPC.

conspiracy

mutual agreement or understanding, express or implied, between two or more persons to commit a criminal act.

conspiracy As long as they generally understand they're involved in the act, that is good enough. They don't need to know the magnitude of the act

Official interpretation defense (mistake of law) under the MPC: A belief that conduct does not legally constitute an offense is a defense to a prosecution for that offense based upon such conduct when he acts in 1. reasonable reliance 2. upon an official statement of the law, 3. afterward determined to be invalid or erroneous, 4. contained in a statute or other enactment.

contained in a statute or other enactment.

MPC legal wrong doctrine Although ignorance or mistake would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the D would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the D shall reduce the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be ____________ to those of the offense of which he would have been guilty had the situation been as he supposed.

convicted

It's hard to argue a mistake of law defense bc you had to have been __________ at the time you made it and then later on the law changed to make you incorrect, but at the time you relied on it, you would've had to be _____________.

correct

Effectuation of arrest or apprehending the felon by police: what is the old common law rule?

could use deadly force for any forcible or non-forcible felony if force is necessary to make the arrest or prevent suspect from escaping (subject to constitutional limitations). Any felony is punishable by death

Involuntary manslaughter CL: Ordinary recklessness or _____________________

criminal negligence

failing to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and such failure constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation

criminal negligence

the person who isn't aware of the risk but should've been

criminal negligence

Under Cl/minority's duty to retreat rule: If defendant knew that he could have safely retreated and didn't, jury can consider that in determining whether he was justified in using ____________.

deadly force If you couldve retreated with complete safety, using deadly force is not necessary

what is the most restrictive defense of habitation?

deadly force can be used against an intruder only if he reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent an imminent, unlawful entry AND that the intruder intends to commit a forcible felony or kill or cause grievous bodily injury to any occupant of the dwelling

What is the more restrictive defense of habitation?

deadly force can only be used where the occupant reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent an imminent, unlawful entry AND the intruder intends to commit a felony or cause injury to any occupant of the dwelling

For wilfull blindness, plaintiff must show: Requires a showing that the defendant (1) (2) took deliberate actions to avoid learning that fact.

def subjectively believed there was a high probability that a fact existed (e.g., that drugs were in the car)

For wilfull blindness, plaintiff must show: Requires a showing that the defendant (1) subjectively believed there was a high probability that a fact existed (e.g., that drugs were in the car) and (2)

def took deliberate actions to avoid learning that fact.

M'Naghten rule for insanity Accused was laboring under such a ___________ of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong.

defect

Under causation does def have to be "the" cause or just "a" cause in the incident?

defendant only has to be "a" cause, not the "the" cause (There can be more than 1 but-for cause).

In determining the reasonableness of the defendant's actions, we view it from the ____________ viewpoint, taking into account the defendant's sex, sexual orientation, pregnancy, disabilities, and similar characteristics.

defendant's

attempt has two defenses: 1. defense of impossibility 2.

defense of abandonment

Under the original CL _______________________, occupant of dwelling could use any force necessary (including deadly force) if he reasonably believed that force was necessary to prevent an imminent, unlawful entry

defense of habitation

Crim undertaking fails bc of impossibility when, though the actor would be committing a crime if he did everything he intends under the conditions that he believes exist at the time, what he actually does or what he would do if he fully acted on his intent is not the offense he intends to commit bc the conditions arent what he believes them to be

defense of impossibility

attempt has two defenses: 1. 2. defense of abandonment

defense of impossibility

Majority rule for __________________ justification defense when the D uses force against another person to defend a 3rd person that D reasonably believes is in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Like self defense, imminence, necessity and proportionality are required

defense of others

instead of protecting yourself, you're protecting someone else in defense. this is called _______________________

defense of others

necessity and duress are ___________

defenses

_______________ is present if the thinking (premeditation) is being done in such a cool mental state, under such circumstances, and for such a period of time as to permit a careful weighing of the proposed decision

deliberation

carefully weighing such matters as the wisdom of going ahead with the killing quality of the accused's thought processes. Undertaken with a cool head

deliberation

must have enough of a cool head to be able to think "do I really want to do this" "what are the consequences of committing this" "I need to weigh my options"

deliberation, focuses on quality CL 1st degree murder requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation

Intent to kill + premeditation + _____________ = 1st degree murder CL

deliberation, focuses on quality. Measure and evaluate the choice or problem

__________________________ is where the person is weighing options, often need a "cool head"

deliberation. focuses on quality. Measure and evaluate the choice or problem 1st degree murder requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation

An unintentional homicide when the individual who kills acts with an abandoned and malignant heart CL

depraved heart (implied malice)

This unintentional CL homicide is where the individual doesn't care if he kills

depraved heart (implied malice)

extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk

depraved heart murder

this justification for punishment can be either general or specific

deterrence

Intent of supplier who knows of illegal use of their goods/services may be established by: (1) (2) through an inference that he intends to participate based on (a) his special interest in activity (3 examples on prior slide), or (b) aggravated nature of crime itself.

direct evidence that he intends to participate

In determining the reasonableness of the defendant's actions, we view it from the defendant's viewpoint, taking into account the defendant's sex, sexual orientation, pregnancy, __________________, and similar characteristics.

disabilities

MPC Intentional Manslaughter: Homicide that would otherwise be murder is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional ___________ for which there is reasonable explanation or excuse. [Reasonableness determined from viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under circumstances as he believes them to be]

disturbance

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental ________________ test: Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

disturbance

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional ___________ for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

disturbance

intent to aid the principal party and intent that the principal commit that crime.

dual intent in the context of accomplice liability mens rea

Def claims she was threatened by another with physical force either to herself or a 3rd party unless she committed a specific crime

duress

cannot have a ___________________ for killing someone

duress defense This is the general rule regarding duress for homicide

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme ________________ or _____________ disturbance test: Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

emotional or mental

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance has an extreme emotional reaction to something, as a result of which there is a loss of self-control and reason is overborne by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar ____________.

emotions

burglary elements: 1. 2. Of a structure 3. With the knowledge that the entry is not licensed AND 4. With the intent to commit a crime within the structure

entry

MPC Intentional Manslaughter: Homicide that would otherwise be murder is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is reasonable explanation or ___________. [Reasonableness determined from viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under circumstances as he believes them to be]

excuse

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or __________. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

excuse

MPC Intentional Manslaughter: Homicide that would otherwise be murder is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is reasonable _____________ or excuse. [Reasonableness determined from viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under circumstances as he believes them to be]

explanation

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such _______________ or _____________ shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

explanation or excuse

if the intervening cause is responsive (dependent), the def is the proximate cause unless the intervening cause is _____________________________.

extremely unusual or bizarre

intention is to commit a crime but cannot finish because of some circumstance unknown to her or beyond her control. NOT a defense.

factual impossibility

what is the exception to general rule of accomplice liability

failure to object when one has a duty to oppose it, such as in a special relationship.

Under common law, you can use duress as a defense if you kill someone true or false

false Under common law, you cannot use duress if you kill someone

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance has an extreme emotional reaction to something, as a result of which there is a loss of self-control and reason is overborne by intense _____________, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions.

feelings

Felony murder is a death that occurs during the commission of certain ___________, subject to inherently dangerous felony rule and merger doctrine.

felonies

A death that occurs during the commission of certain felonies, subject to inherently dangerous felony rule and merger doctrine.

felony murder

Under _____________________ you don't have to have mens rea. Only need intent to commit the felony and then a killing that occurs during the death.

felony murder rule

Until you've reached a place of temporary safety, the felony is still ongoing. So if you kill someone in that escape, _______________ can apply

felony murder rule

____________________ allows severe punishment for things that could be called accidents

felony murder rule

strict liability for the homicide committed during commission of felony

felony murder rule

4 diff mental states that can constitute malice aforethought (4 ways of getting to a murder charge under the common law): 1. Intent to kill, including knowledge that death was substantially certain 2. Intent or knowledge of serious (or grievous) bodily harm 3. Depraved heart murder- extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk 4.

felony murder rule- strict liability for the homicide committed during commission of felony (don't have to have mens rea. Only need intent to commit the felony and then a killing that occurs during the death)

Distinguishing larceny by trick and embezzlement

for larceny by trick, initial taking is achieved by deceit and is thus never considered poss (only custody), whereas with embezzlement, the def receives lawful poss of the property

________________ is an essential element of a rape crime and to justify a conviction, the evidence must warrant a conclusion either that the victim resisted and her resistance was overcome by force or that she was prevented from resisting by threats to her safety.

force one of the rape elements

robbery elements: 1. Intentionally using 2. 3. Take and carry away the prop of another from his person or in his presence

force or threat of force to Force element can also be met if the defendant peacefully acquires the victim's property but then uses force to retain or escape with it

Every intervening cause(s) that comes in between def's conduct and the victim's death, look at what test?

foreseeability test

If the intervening cause is coincidental (independent), the def is relieved of criminal liability (not the proximate cause) unless the intervening cause is ________________.

foreseeable

If you're in hospital bc of def's conduct, and you receive neg medical care, is this foreseeable or unforeseeable?

foreseeable. Bc it happens enough and we don't always want to relieve def's of liability.

crime is complete when agreement is formed, and (in most jurisdictions) overt act is required.

formation Only has to be 1 overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. Doesn't have to be criminal, can be small And it is often much less than what we would have for actus reus of intent

Justification for punishment: Deterrence: is this general or specific: we punish ppl so they know if they commit a crime, they'll go to jail. applies to the public at large. When the public learns of an individual defendant's punishment, the public is theoretically less likely to commit a crime because of fear of the punishment the defendant experienced. preventing the offender from repeating the same or other criminal acts or aim to discourage the general public from recourse to crime

general deterrence

Is this general or specific intent: Common law larceny: "Trespassory taking and carrying away of the personal property of another with the intent to steal.

general intent

Is this general or specific intent: Common law rape: "Sexual intercourse by a male with a female not his wife, without her consent.

general intent

when the definition of a crime consists of only the description of a particular act, without reference to intent to do a further act or achieve a future consequence, we ask whether the def intended to do the proscribed act

general intent ex. Arson is general intent ex. Recklessness or negligence is general intent

(good/reasonable) faith means you subjectively thought something

good faith

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a ___________ _________ from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

gross deviation

Under MPC, a person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a _________ ___________ from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation

gross deviation

manslaughter under MPC has to be recklessness whereas you can get to manslaughter under common law with either recklessness or ______________

gross negligence

Let's say you're guilty but mentally ill. You treat your condition by going to a mental institution and they cure you and find you physically fit. Do you have to go prison or are you free?

have to go back to prison whereas under not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI), you're just free and let go Guilty but mentally ill does not rise to the level of insanity like NGRI does

MPC Accomplice liability A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if: with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he (i) solicits such other person to commit it; or (ii) aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing it; or (iii)

having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the offense, fails to make proper effort to do so

actus reus

helllo hello

Introduction, principles of punishment

hello hello

Role of jury and statutory interpretation

hello hello

causation

hello hello

felony murder

hello hello

homicide/murder

hello hello

mens rea: intent and knowledge

hello hello

self defense

hello hello

unintentional killing

hello hello

voluntary manslaughter

hello hello

Intent of supplier who knows of illegal use of their goods/services may be established by: (1) direct evidence that he intends to participate; or (2) through an inference that he intends to participate based on (a) (b) aggravated nature of crime itself.

his special interest in activity (3 examples on prior slide)

the unlawful killing of a human being

homicide

MPC Unintentional Manslaughter: Homicide committed recklessly but not recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of _______________, because that would be murder under MPC.

human life

goal was illegal but commission of offense was impossible due to a factual mistake about the legal status of an attendant circumstance. Was a defense under common law, but MPC rejects and 37 states have followed. not a defense

hybrid legal impossibility

Under MPC, a person acts knowingly with respect to a material element of an offense when: 1. if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist; and 2.

if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.

Under MPC, a person acts knowingly with respect to a material element of an offense when: 1. 2. if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.

if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist

When can police and private citizens use non-deadly force (running/tackling someone)?

if they have a reasonable belief that: 1. Such other person is committing or has committed a felony or a misdemeanor for breach of peace AND 2. Force is necessary to prevent commission of the crime or to effectuate the arrest

The CL/MPC general rule under mistake of law __________ of the law is no excuse

ignorance

MPC legal wrong doctrine Although ____________ or ______________ would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the D would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the D shall reduce the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be convicted to those of the offense of which he would have been guilty had the situation been as he supposed.

ignorance or mistake

Majority rule for defense of others: justification defense when the D uses force against another person to defend a 3rd person that D reasonably believes is in _____________ danger of death or serious bodily harm. Like self defense, imminence, necessity and proportionality are required

imminent

Does an act that involves a high probability of death with a conscious disregard of human life. "Depraved heart" name this homicide

implied malice

def acted with gross recklessness and manifested an extreme indifference to human life, meaning that the def realized that his actions created a substantial and unjustified risk of death and yet went ahead and committed the actions anyway

implied malice

when the circumstances attending the killing show an "abandoned or malignant heart" or "depraved heart" or extreme recklessness manifesting an indifference to human life

implied malice

Pinkerton Rule Conspirator can be liable for crime committed by another member of the conspiracy even if that other crime was not part of the original agreement as long as unintended crime was: (1) (2) within the scope of the conspiracy; or (3) reasonably foreseeable consequence of the original agreement.

in furtherance of the conspiracy;

Under CL's Mistake of Fact If it's a general intent crime, mistake has to be both reasonable and ___________________________ (honest) to be a defense.

in good faith

Under CL's Mistake of fact: If specific intent crime, mistake only has to be _________________________.

in good faith. As long as you can convince a jury that it was in good faith, you can be ok

4 Justifications for Punishment: 1.Deterrence (general or specific) 2. 3.Rehabilitation 4.Retribution

incapacitation

Justification for punishment: danger to society, get them off the streets by putting them in prison. prevents future crime by removing the defendant from society. Ex. house arrest, or execution pursuant to the death penalty.

incapacitation

You've done all of the steps before/leading up to the crime but didn't pull the trigger of the gun yet. Planning and preparation leading up to the crime is where we are focusing on actus reus being met

incomplete crimes (attempt)

Under the merger doctrine (limitation of felony murder rule), _________________________ is a different test where the felony has an independent purpose other than to assault the victim. The felony will not merge with the homicide under the merger doctrine and felony murder rule can apply.

independent felonious purpose

MPC Unintentional Manslaughter: Homicide committed recklessly but not recklessness manifesting extreme ______________ to the value of human life, because that would be murder under MPC.

indifference

Felony murder is a death that occurs during the commission of certain felonies, subject to ____________ dangerous felony rule and merger doctrine.

inherently

felony murder rule If it's an unenumerated felony (so not rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and kidnapping) what are the 3 limitations you must look at? 1. 2. res gestae requirement 3. merger doctrine

inherently dangerous felony limitation

Irresistible Impulse or Control Test for insanity If due to a diseased mind, a person abstractly knows that a given act is wrong, but yet by an __________________, he is irresistibly driven to commit it, he has an insanity defense.

insane impulse

The ides is that we don't want tot take someone thru a crim trial and convict that person if they don't know what's going on (they cant help themselves)

insanity

Under _____________ cannot proceed if defendant is not competent to stand trial.

insanity

Under ________________ must have sufficient present ability to consult with lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and must have an understanding of the proceedings.

insanity

mental illness is a medical concept, whereas __________ is a legal term.

insanity

1. One acts with the requisite intent if it is the conscious object or purpose to cause a certain result or to engage in certain prohibited conduct. 2. One intends a particular social harm if one knows to a virtual certainty that one's actions will cause that social harm. what do the above elements define?

intent

Under mens rea, attempt crimes have two intents: 1. 2. intent to commit the completed act (i.e., murder).

intent to commit the acts that constitute the actus reus of attempt and

Under mens rea, attempt crimes have two intents: 1. intent to commit the acts that constitute the actus reus of attempt and 2.

intent to commit the completed act (i.e., murder).

Is voluntary manslaughter under CL intentional or unintentional?

intentional

Step 1: If it's a _________________, killing, start with 2nd degree murder

intentional

attempted murder can only be (intentional/unintentional)

intentional

is voluntary manslaughter intentional or unintentional?

intentional, its the intent to kill in the heat of passion

Mens rea for CL: Wilfully, maliciously, ____________, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently

intentionally

anything that can give you an intoxicating effect

intoxication. doesnt just mean alcohol

________________________ is where def brought death of another human being thru criminal neg (gross neg or recklessness)

involuntary manslaughter

Simple recklessness or gross (criminal) negligence under common law name that homicide

involuntary manslaughter. unintentional!

A person is justified in the use of force to defend himself against an aggressor's imminent use of unlawful force to the extent it appears reasonable to him under the circumstances. jury instruction or new instruction

jury instruction self defense

When jurors believe the facts as proven by the prosecution and understand that, under the law, the defendant has committed a crime, but for some reasons, decide to acquit the defendant. The act of returning a verdict contrary to law

jury nullification

what is the majority rule for defense of others?

justification defense when the D uses force against another person to defend a 3rd person that D reasonably believes is in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Like self defense, imminence, necessity and proportionality are required

There are 5 enumerated felonies: rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and _________________

kidnapping

Felony + ___________ = murder under felony murder rule

killing

1. if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist; and 2. if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result. these elements are for one of MPC's mental states for mens rea

knowingly

Mens rea for CL: Wilfully, maliciously, intentionally, ____________, recklessly, and negligently

knowingly

Mens rea for MPC: purposely, ______________, recklessly, negligently

knowingly

Murder under MPC is homicide committed purposely or ___________

knowingly

Under MPC is the following purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently? Jacob wanted to kill Vanessa, his wife. He drove his car at a very high rate of speed into Vanessa, who was holding Xavier, their infant son, in her arms. Jacob fervently hoped that Xavier would survive the collision. The car struck Vanessa and Xavier, killing both instantly.

knowingly

Under MPC, a person acts _______________ with respect to a material element of an offense when: 1. if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist; and 2. if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.

knowingly

MPC Mistake of Fact: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the purpose, ____________, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense.

knowledge

Under MPC, When ____________ of the existence of a particular fact is an element of an offense, such ________________ is established if a person is aware of a high probability of its existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist.

knowledge

Under CL, ________________ is where D is aware of that fact or correctly believes the fact exists. (This is sometimes called actual or positive).

knowledge This is sometimes called actual or positive knowledge

Irresistible Impulse or Control Test for insanity If due to a diseased mind, a person abstractly __________ that a given act is wrong, but yet by an insane impulse, he is irresistibly driven to commit it, he has an insanity defense.

knows

Name that crime: taking and carrying away of personal property of another with intent to steal the property

larceny

_______________ obtains custody thru deceit with intent to permanently deprive owner Someone obtains custody thru deceit with intent to deprive the owner "give me that and ill put it where it needs to go" then they just go off with it

larceny by trick

MPC's ____________________ is similar to common law's ______________________ but with MPC, it says we are only going to convict you of the lower crime

legal wrong doctrine

duty to retreat rule: stand your ground is this majority or minority?

majority

is this the minority or majority rule for force for felonies when it comes to preventing crime: can only use deadly force to prevent commission of forcible or atrocious felonies

majority rule

______________ is the legal term of art or technical label for the mens rea of murder

malice aforethought

murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with _________________________.

malice aforethought

1.An actual intent to do the harm. 2.Recklessness as to whether such harm should occur or not. what do the above elements define?

malicious

Mens rea for CL: Wilfully, ____________, intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently

maliciously

MPC's unintentional homicides 1. murder 2. 3. negligent homicide

manslaughter

_____________________ is the unlawful killing of a human being by another human being without malice aforethought

manslaughter

Difference between manslaughter in MPC and CL?

manslaughter under MPC has to be recklessness whereas you can get to manslaughter under common law with either recklessness or gross neg

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a ________ _________ of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

material element

Under MPC, a person acts recklessly with respect to a _______________ _______________ of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation

material element

__________________ is a medical concept, whereas insanity is a legal term.

medical illness

Default rule: Even when _______ _________ is not expressed, it should be implied unless it falls into one of the exceptions for strict liability crimes.

mens rea

Under MPC approach to ____________________, each material element of offense has to be proven with some specified mental state. Material elements such as: 1) nature of forbidden conduct; 2) attendant circumstances; 3) result of conduct.

mens rea

Under ______________, attempt crimes have two intents: 1. intent to commit the acts that constitute the actus reus of attempt and 2. intent to commit the completed act (i.e., murder).

mens rea

encompasses the mental part of the crime. a person's mental state provided for in the definition of the offense

mens rea

malice aforethought is the legal term of art or technical label for the __________________ of murder

mens rea

Product test for insanity: an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of ____________________ or mental defect

mental disease

MPC Intentional Manslaughter: Homicide that would otherwise be murder is committed under the influence of extreme __________ or ____________ disturbance for which there is reasonable explanation or excuse. [Reasonableness determined from viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under circumstances as he believes them to be]

mental or emotional

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme __________ or ___________ disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

mental or emotional

Felony murder is a death that occurs during the commission of certain felonies, subject to inherently dangerous felony rule and _______________________.

merger doctrine

felony murder rule If it's an unenumerated felony (so not rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and kidnapping) what are the 3 limitations you must look at? 1. inherently dangerous felony limitation 2. res gestae requirement 3.

merger doctrine

If underlying felony is "assaultive" in nature, it _____________ with the homicide and cannot be the basis of a felony murder instruction.

merges this is the merger doctrine which is the 3rd limitation under felony murder rule

For (majority/minority) rule defense of others, you could only have defense of others if you: 1. Were correct about the need to use force Ex. That the person you are defending would have been justified in using force (Act-at-Peril rule) AND 2. If you were in a special status relationship with the person being protected Ex. Wouldn't have the defense if you were protecting a complete stranger

minority

is this the minority or majority rule for force for felonies when it comes to preventing crime: can use deadly force to prevent commission of any felony (even if non-violent)

minority

If you couldve retreated with complete safety, using deadly force is not necessary is this the minority rule or majority rule for duty to retreat?

minority/common law

what is common law's mistake of fact rule for general intent

mistake has to be both reasonable and in good faith (honest) to be a defense.

Under CL's __________________ If it's a general intent crime, mistake has to be both reasonable and in good faith (honest) to be a defense.

mistake of fact

1. a person reasonably relies on an official interpretation of the law that turns out to be erroneous (entrapment by estoppel) 2. Ignorance can be a defense if knowledge that the prohibited conduct is unlawful is an element of the crime. (Lack of knowledge negates the mens rea.) the two exceptions listed above are for what doctrine?

mistake of law

ignorance of the law is no excuse. this is the general CL/MPC rule for what doctrine?

mistake of law

what is common law's mistake of fact rule for specific intent?

mistake only has to be in good faith. As long as you can convince a jury that it was in good faith, you can be ok

use of deadly force in law enforcement limited to forcible or atrocious felonies Effectuation of arrest or apprehending the felon by police. Is this the modern rule or old common law rule?

modern rule

Regarding defense of property, what is the general rule on trap guns?

most states hold that someone can be criminally liable if they use a deadly mechanical device, and that device kills or injures someone Why? Bc Trap gun cant decide last minute not to shoot, it has no brain or discretion. Cant see who is there and who is trying to get in

MPC Manslaughter: Homicide that would otherwise be __________ is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is reasonable explanation or excuse. [Reasonableness determined from viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under circumstances as he believes them to be]

murder

MPC Unintentional Manslaughter: Homicide committed recklessly but not recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, because that would be ____________ under MPC.

murder

MPC's unintentional homicides 1. 2. manslaughter 3. negligent homicide

murder

Necessity and defense cant be used as a defense to ____________ under CL but can be used as a defense to murder under MPC

murder

Unlawful killing of human being is committed with malice aforethought and constitutes _____________ under CL when any one of four conditions are present: 1. Intent to kill 2. Intent to commit serious bodily injury 3. Abandoned and malignant heart or depraved heart OR 4. Felony murder rule applies

murder

_______________ is the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought

murder

If you cause a death when committing the felony, you have committed ___________.

murder felony murder rule

Homicide committed purposely or knowingly.

murder under MPC

Felony + a killing = _________________

murder under felony murder rule

what must defendant do if he wants expert testimony?

must tell government and submit to expert evaluation.

accomplice can be convicted of other crimes beyond the one planned/intended if they were a reasonably foreseeable consequences of the intended crime.

natural and probable consequences doctrine

M'Naghten rule for insanity Accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the ____________ and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong.

nature

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a ________ and ________ that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

nature and degree

Under MPC, a person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a ___________ and _____________ that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation

nature and degree

Under MPC approach to mens rea, each material element of offense has to be proven with some specified mental state. Material elements such as: 1) 2) attendant circumstances; 3) result of conduct.

nature of forbidden conduct;

Under ______________, defendant's actions must be necessary to prevent an even greater harm from occurring.

necessity

What are these the elements to? 1. Harm avoided greater than harm caused. 2. D seeking to avoid clear & imminent danger. 3. Causal connection: reasonable for D to believe his illegal conduct would abate the harm. 4. No effective legal alternative. 5. Legislature has not spoken on issue. 6. D not at fault in creating situation.

necessity

________________ provides an affirmative defense to the actor in situations in which the harm caused by breaking the law is less than the harm avoided by the action

necessity

After hurricane Catrina, some people were breaking into pharmacies to get life saving drugs what is this an example of

necessity being used as a defense

Prisoners escape prison bc prison is on fire what is this an example of

necessity being used as a defense

sometimes the greater good is served by breaking the law than by obeying it so the def should NOT be criminally punished

necessity defense

MPC Mistake of Fact: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake _________ the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense.

negates

Under MPC, voluntary intoxication is a defense if it __________ an element of the offense.

negates

MPC Mistake of Fact: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or _____________ required to establish a material element of the offense.

negligence

When ____________ homicide is committed negligently under MPC

negligent MPC negligent homicide

MPC's unintentional homicides 1. murder 2. manslaughter 3.

negligent homicide

criminal negligence. name that homicide

negligent homicide unintentional MPC

Mens rea for CL: Wilfully, maliciously, intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, and _______________

negligently

Mens rea for MPC: purposely, knowingly, recklessly, ____________

negligently

Negligent Homicide under MPC is when it is committed _________

negligently

Under MPC, a person acts __________ with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

negligently

A person is justified in the use of force against an aggressor when and to the extent it appears to him and he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself against such aggressor's imminent use of unlawful force. A reasonable belief implies both a belief and the existence of facts that would persuade a reasonable man to that belief. jury instruction or new instruction

new instruction self defense

Under common law, can you use duress defense if you kill someone?

no

under the dangerous proximity test, you dont know where the person is. are you in dangerous proximity to them?

no, You have to have found that person

Under entrapment by estoppel, if someone relied on advice from a worker at a driver's license bureau, and then commit a crime by driving on an expired license, do they have a valid defense?

no, defendant cannot rely on a worker from the DMV who is telling him something. DMV worker is not an official charged with interpreting the statutes exam review

Can deadly force be used for crime prevention or to effectuate arrests for misdemeanors?

no, never

MPC 222.1 (1) defines robbery as follows: "A person is guilty of robbery if, in the course of committing a theft, he (a) inflicts serious bodily injury upon another. . ." Is Toby guilty of robbery if, while committing a theft, he negligently inflicts serious bodily injury upon Ursula?

no. robbery is not a violation. So every element must have a mens rea attached. Bc inflicting serious bodily injury doesn't have a mens rea attached, we know it has to at least be recklessly. Bc toby only negligently inflicted bodily injury, he couldn't be found guilty of this crime

If defendant is found guilty, defendant must assert special plea that he is ________________.

not guilty by reason of insanity

def did the crime as alleged, but bc they are insane, they are found not guilty

not guilty by reason of insanity

Accomplice has to actually have taken some action to be guilty as an accomplice. it could be something very little that they do but the must do something

note

Attempting to aid: under CL you can solicit/aid/encourage even if its pretty minor. But under MPC, simply attempting to help could be enough. So even if you didn't tell the person you're going to be a lookout and tried to warn, that could be enough

note

Exception: Under MPC, unless it's a "violation" (defined as something for which there is no prison time. Ex. Traffic violation or someone who sells liquor to minor), every element of crime has to have a mens rea attached. Anything that would have prison time, cannot be strict liability under MPC

note

If no mens rea is listed, it has to be proven with recklessly, knowingly, purposely, but not negligently under MPC

note

Under the legal wrong doctrine under CL, Mistakes of fact can be a defense if its an honest mistake if a specific intent crime. If a general intent crime, mistake has to be both honest and reasonable

note

in order to cut off liability, a coincidental intervening cause only has to be unforeseeable, but a responsive intervening cause would have to be both unforeseeable and highly abnormal or bizarre.

note

negligent homicide is the same thing as criminal negligence

note

MPC allows "unilateral" agreement as long as D believes someone is agreeing with him.

note conspiracy

MPC takes the position that it can be just a one sided agreement. "you think you're entering into an agreement but the other person might be an undercover cop". This is ok under the MPC but not under CL

note. this is for conspiracy

"The risk that V might suffer serious injury or death either during the assault or in her attempt to avoid it, was inherent in the situation D's attack created. In our view, the fatal result of D's assault is not rendered unforeseeable merely because the precise agency of death, i.e., the Michielli's station wagon, could not have been foretold. D perpetrated a deadly assault on the V in and around an automobile on a public street with other moving vehicles in close proximity. It is absurd to argue that the fatal result was so extraordinary or accidental that appellant should not be held criminally liable for the consequences of his conduct."

notes

What is the original CL's defense of habitation?

occupant of dwelling could use any force necessary (including deadly force) if he reasonably believed that force was necessary to prevent an imminent, unlawful entry

MPC Mistake of Fact: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the __________

offense

MPC legal wrong doctrine Although ignorance or mistake would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the D would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the D shall reduce the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be convicted to those of the ____________ of which he would have been guilty had the situation been as he supposed.

offense

At the time that you make an assumption under MPC's __________________________________ doctrine, you have to be correct about it

official interpretation defense , mistake of law

A belief that conduct does not legally constitute an offense is a defense to a prosecution for that offense based upon such conduct when he acts in 1. reasonable reliance 2. upon an official statement of the law, 3. afterward determined to be invalid or erroneous, 4. contained in a statute or other enactment. What is this doctrine? CL or MPC?

official interpretation defense, MPC (mistake of law)

At the time that you make an assumption under MPC, you have to be correct about it. what is this doctrine?

official interpretation defense, mistake of law

could use deadly force for any forcible or non-forcible felony if force is necessary to make the arrest or prevent suspect from escaping (subject to constitutional limitations). Any felony is punishable by death this is in regard to effectuation of arrest or apprehending the felon by police. Is this the old rule or modern rule?

old common law rule

X intentionally stabs V in the chest. V will die from loss of blood in 15 minutes. Simultaneously, D intentionally shoots V in the leg. V would not die from this wound by itself. V dies in 15 minutes. who is liable

only X, pay attention to the minutes

Voluntary Manslaughter under CL: An intentional homicide, done in a sudden heat of passion, caused by adequate provocation, before there has been a reasonable ______________ to cool.

opportunity

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance has an extreme emotional reaction to something, as a result of which there is a loss of self-control and reason is ______________ by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions.

overborne

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance has an extreme emotional reaction to something, as a result of which there is a loss of self-control and reason is overborne by intense feelings, such as ____________, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions.

passion

In determining the reasonableness of the defendant's actions, we view it from the defendant's viewpoint, taking into account the defendant's sex, sexual orientation, _________________, disabilities, and similar characteristics.

pregnancy

killer must have reflected upon and thought about the killing in advance before engaging in the conduct

premeditation

the process simply of thinking about a proposed killing before engaging in the homicidal conduct

premeditation

Intent to kill is enough for murder, but for CL 1st degree murder, you also need _______________ and __________________.

premeditation and deliberation

___________________________ is where one has enough time thinking about it beforehand. Not instantaneous killing

premeditation. focuses on quantity of time. Think about it beforehand 1st degree murder requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation

Under __________________, jury may presume that the homeowner's belief in the need to use deadly force to protect against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury was reasonable

presumption

an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect This test will allow full and complete testimony. Can talk about all of the ways (both cognitive and volitional) which insanity test is this?

product test both volitional and cognitive

Voluntary Manslaughter under CL: An intentional homicide, done in a sudden heat of passion, caused by adequate _____________, before there has been a reasonable opportunity to cool.

provocation

Between def's conduct and death of victim, something intervenes what does this fall under?

proximate cause

Under _________________ the question to ask is: when is the intervening event so out of the ordinary that it no longer seems fair to say that the social harm was caused by the defendant's conduct?

proximate cause

Under causation, need both actual (but-for) cause and ________________________. This is only an issue in result crimes (often homicide).

proximate cause

is this intervening thing that happened between def's illegal conduct and the victim dying, does this thing happening in the middle cut off def's liability and say "def you are not liable". Should this cut off def's liability

proximate cause

-Minor violations of liquor laws -pure food laws -distribution of lawful narcotics -motor vehicle and traffic regulations -sanitary, building, and factory laws. what are these examples of?

public welfare laws

law does not prohibit the conduct or the result that defendant sought to achieve. IS a defense.

pure legal impossibility

MPC Mistake of Fact: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the _________, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense.

purpose

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and __________ of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

purpose

1. If the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and 2. If the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist these elements are for one of MPC's mental states for mens rea

purposely

A fires a gun at B, intending to kill B, but instead killing C. Under MPC, did A kill C purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently?

purposely

Mens rea for MPC: ___________, knowingly, recklessly, negligently

purposely

Murder under MPC is homicide committed __________ or knowingly

purposely

Under MPC, a person acts ____________ with respect to a material element of an offense when: 1. If the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and 2. If the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist

purposely

MPC Substantial Step Test 1. 2. conduct that may be held substantial: not a substantial step unless the conduct is "strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose." -Non-exhaustive list of conduct which, if strongly corroborative of the actor's criminal purpose, shall not be held insufficient as a matter of law. (ex. Lying and waiting, searching for someone, following someone)

purposely does something which is an act constituting a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime.

M'Naghten rule for isanity Accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and ___________ of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong.

quality

There are 5 enumerated felonies: ________________, robbery, arson, burglary, and kidnapping

rape

What are the 5 enumerated felonies?

rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and kidnapping

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance has an extreme emotional ______________ to something, as a result of which there is a loss of self-control and reason is overborne by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions.

reaction

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance has an extreme emotional reaction to something, as a result of which there is a loss of self-control and ______________ is overborne by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions.

reason

Under CL's Mistake of Fact If it's a general intent crime, mistake has to be both ___________ and in good faith (honest) to be a defense.

reasonable

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a ______________ explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

reasonable

belief as to the intention of another to use deadly force need not be correct but it must be ___________

reasonable self defense

(good/reasonable) faith what a reasonable person would think (jury is capable of figuring out what a reasonable person would've thought)

reasonable faith. As long as a person can convince the jury that they had a belief and truly believed that (regardless of how outlandish or weird it might be), then they have a defense

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a __________ ___________ would observe in the actor's situation.

reasonable person

Official interpretation defense (mistake of law) under the MPC: A belief that conduct does not legally constitute an offense is a defense to a prosecution for that offense based upon such conduct when he acts in 1. 2. upon an official statement of the law, 3. afterward determined to be invalid or erroneous, 4. contained in a statute or other enactment.

reasonable reliance

In determining the _________________ of the defendant's actions, we view it from the defendant's viewpoint, taking into account the defendant's sex, sexual orientation, pregnancy, disabilities, and similar characteristics.

reasonableness

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. ______________ of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

reasonableness

Pinkerton Rule Conspirator can be liable for crime committed by another member of the conspiracy even if that other crime was not part of the original agreement as long as unintended crime was: (1) in furtherance of the conspiracy; (2) within the scope of the conspiracy; or (3)

reasonably foreseeable consequence of the original agreement

MPC Unintentional Manslaughter: Homicide committed _____________ but not recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, because that would be murder under MPC.

recklessly

Mens rea for CL: Wilfully, maliciously, intentionally, knowingly, ____________, and negligently

recklessly

Mens rea for MPC: purposely, knowingly, ___________, negligently

recklessly

Under MPC is the following purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently? Roberta despised modern architecture. Therefore, she decided to burn down Sam's modern residence. Roberta did not want Sam to die, whom she knew was inside, so she tossed salt over her left shoulder immediately before she torched the residence. Roberta was genuinely convinced that this would protect Sam from all harm. Much to her surprise, Sam was burned to death in the fire.

recklessly

Under MPC, a person acts _____________ with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation

recklessly

Involuntary manslaughter CL: Ordinary ____________(awareness of a substantial and unjustifiable risk) or criminal negligence (failing to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and such failure constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation) This is often called "gross negligence" but it differs from recklessness because there is not an awareness of the risk.

recklessness

MPC Mistake of Fact: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact . . . is a defense if the mistake negates the purpose, knowledge, belief, _____________ or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense.

recklessness

MPC Unintentional Manslaughter: Homicide committed recklessly but not _______________ manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, because that would be murder under MPC.

recklessness

awareness of a substantial and unjustifiable risk

recklessness

Define Malicious: 1.An actual intent to do the harm. 2.

recklessness as to whether such harm should occur or not.

Difference between recklessness and negligence?

recklessness: aware of risk negligence: not aware of risk but you should've been

MPC legal wrong doctrine Although ignorance or mistake would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the D would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the D shall __________ the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be convicted to those of the offense of which he would have been guilty had the situation been as he supposed.

reduce

4 Justifications for Punishment: 1.Deterrence (general or specific) 2.Incapacitation 3. 4.Retribution

rehabilitation

Justification for punishment: by punishing someone, they'll get to be law abiding citizens. You need to become a better person so we're going to put you in jail. prevents future crime by altering a defendant's behavior ex. educational and vocational programs, treatment center placement, and counseling.

rehabilitation

Under the felony murder rule, if the felony is unenumerated, name this limitation: 1. Temporal: felony and homicide must be close in time and geographical proximity (continues until D reaches a place of temporary safety). Until you've reached a place of temporary safety, the felony is still ongoing. So if you kill someone in that escape, felony murder rule can apply 2. Causal connection between felony and homicide. some court say as long as there's a but for connection, that's all that matters even if it seems unlikely that the killing occurred from your actions Other courts (like the weed plane crash) will be looking for more, will be looking for more of a direct connection.

res gestae

Causal connection between felony and homicide. The above requirement belongs to which felony murder rule limitation?

res gestae some court say as long as there's a but for connection, that's all that matters even if it seems unlikely that the killing occurred from your actions Other courts (like the weed plane crash) will be looking for more, will be looking for more of a direct connection.

felony murder rule If it's an unenumerated felony (so not rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and kidnapping) what are the 3 limitations you must look at? 1. inherently dangerous felony limitation 2. 3. merger doctrine

res gestae requirement

felony murder applies when killing is so closely related to felony in time to make it part of the The requirement listed above is part of which limitation of the felony murder rule?

res gestae's causal connection

MPC for duress: It is an affirmative defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was coerced to do so by the use of, or a threat to use, unlawful force against his person or the person of another, that a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to _____________.

resist

A ______________ intervening cause is one that is dependent upon or responsive to the def's voluntary act

responsive (dependent)

Has to be both unforeseeable + abnormal/bizarre to cut off chain of causation which will then relieve wrongdoer of liability what type of intervening cause is this?

responsive (dependent) intervening cause

a responsive intervening cause does NOT relieve initial wrongdoer unless the response was not only unforeseeable but also highly abnormal or bizarre. what type of intervening cause is this?

responsive (dependent) intervening cause

a _______________________ cause does NOT relieve initial wrongdoer unless the response was not only unforeseeable but also highly abnormal or bizarre.

responsive intervening

Under causation, need both actual (but-for) cause and proximate cause. This is only an issue in _________________________ (often homicide).

result crimes

Under MPC approach to mens rea, each material element of offense has to be proven with some specified mental state. Material elements such as: 1) nature of forbidden conduct; 2) attendant circumstances; 3) result of conduct.

result of conduct.

4 Justifications for Punishment: 1.Deterrence (general or specific) 2.Incapacitation 3.Rehabilitation 4.

retribution

Justification for punishment: did something wrong and you have to be punished. intentional infliction of pain and suffering on a criminal to the extent he deserves it bc he has willingly committed a crime an eye for an eye

retribution

felonious taking of personal property in the poss of another, from his person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear

robbery

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance has an extreme emotional reaction to something, as a result of which there is a loss of _________________ and reason is overborne by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions.

self control

Majority rule for defense of others: justification defense when the D uses force against another person to defend a 3rd person that D reasonably believes is in imminent danger of death or _____________________. Like self defense, imminence, necessity and proportionality are required

serious bodily harm

In determining the reasonableness of the defendant's actions, we view it from the defendant's viewpoint, taking into account the defendant's _________, sexual orientation, pregnancy, disabilities, and similar characteristics.

sex

In determining the reasonableness of the defendant's actions, we view it from the defendant's viewpoint, taking into account the defendant's sex, _______________, pregnancy, disabilities, and similar characteristics.

sexual orientation

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's _________.

situation

______________ is the negation, endangering, or destruction of an individual, group, or state interest which is deemed socially valuable

social harm

but-for test: actual cause But for the defendant's voluntary acts, would the _______________________ have occurred when it did?

social harm

causation connects voluntary act with the __________________________

social harm

MPC Accomplice liability A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if: with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he (i) (ii) aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing it; or (iii) having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the offense, fails to make proper effort to do so

solicits such other person to commit it

def's intent to do some further act or achieve some additional consequence

special intent

Is this general or specific intent: Intentional receipt of stolen property, with knowledge that it is stolen.

special intent, #3! 1. Intention by the actor to commit some future act, separate from the actus reus (possession with intent to sell). 2. Proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause humiliation) 3. Proof of actor's awareness of an attendant circumstance (intent to sell obscene literature to a person known to be under the age of 18).

is attempt a general or specific intent crime?

specific

1st degree murder CL is a (general/specific) intent crime

specific 1st degree murder requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation

intentionally taking wooden beams with the intent to steal and keep them general or specific intent

specific theres two mens rea here: the intent to do the conduct combined with the intent to steal it (making this a specific intent crime)

Justification for punishment: Deterrence: is this general or specific: about the individual, him or herself. Idea that we want to deter you from committing multiple crimes. So we punish someone more severally bc its their 2nd or 3rd offenses vs just their first offense. applies to an individual defendant. When the government punishes an individual defendant, he or she is theoretically less likely to commit another crime because of fear of another similar or worse punishment.

specific deterrence

What kind of intent is this: categories 1. Intention by the actor to commit some future act, separate from the actus reus (possession with intent to sell). 2. Proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (offensive contact upon another with the intent to cause humiliation) 3. Proof of actor's awareness of an attendant circumstance (intent to sell obscene literature to a person known to be under the age of 18).

specific intent

Under CL's Mistake of fact: If ______________________________, mistake only has to be in good faith. As long as you can convince a jury that it was in good faith, you can be ok

specific intent crime

what is the majority rule for the duty to retreat?

stand your ground

Under MPC, a person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the ____________ of __________ that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation

standard of conduct

___________________ has strict liability with respect to the victim's age

statutory rape

sexual intercourse with an underage person

statutory rape

MPC says you have to find a mens rea for every part of the offense regarding ___________________

strict liability Exception: Under MPC, unless it's a "violation" (defined as something for which there is no prison time. Ex. Traffic violation or someone who sells liquor to minor), every element of crime has to have a mens rea attached. Anything that would have prison time, cannot be strict liability.

what is the felony murder rule

strict liability for the homicide committed during commission of felony

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a _____________ and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

substantial

Under MPC, a person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a _____________ and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation

substantial

Under the felony murder rule, If felony cant be committed without creating a ___________________________________, then it is inherently dangerous

substantial risk of death

Where an intervening cause does relieve defendant of responsibility, this is a ______________ cause.

superseding

the only time mere presence is going to be enough under accomplice liability, is when there is __________

tailure to object when one has a duty to oppose it, such as in a special relationship.

what is the problem when some states dont include a mental state element?

the court must determine whether the legislature purposely left out a mental state element bc it wanted to treat the crime as one of strict liability or whether the omission was inadvertent. The issue is trying to figure out whether omission of mens rea element was intentional or inadvertent.

The _____________________________ says the defendant cannot allege self defense when the defendant has provoked the conflict or is the aggressor in it, UNLESS defendant withdrew from altercation in good faith and informed victim by words or acts.

the exception to self defense

The felony that by its very nature cannot be committed without creating a substantial risk that someone will be killed, the felony is _________________________.

the felony is inherently dangerous

Under the felony murder rule, the unenumerated felony by its very nature cant be created without committing a creating a substantial risk of death

the felony is inherently dangerous

MPC approach to Actus Reus (1) a person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct that includes a voluntary act (2) _____________________________________ A reflex or convulsion; A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual

the following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this section:

when battered woman kills her sleeping spouse when there is no imminent danger, is the killing necessary?

the killing is not reasonably necessary and self defense instruction may not be given. No exception for victims of long term abuse Woman battered syndrome is not a defense to murder Court said she showed no inclination to leave. She couldve left Doesn't just have to be fear of imminent death, can also be fear of serious bodily harm

MPC for duress: It is an affirmative defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was coerced to do so by the use of, or a ___________ to use, unlawful force against his person or the person of another, that a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist.

threat

Intent of supplier who knows of illegal use of their goods/services may be established by: (1) direct evidence that he intends to participate; or (2) (a) his special interest in activity (3 examples on prior slide), or (b) aggravated nature of crime itself.

through an inference that he intends to participate based on

Under __________________, If an individual attempts to shoot and kill one person (X), misses, and instead kills another person (Y), that individual be held criminally liable for intentionally murdering Y.

transferred intent, applies to both CL and MPC

license or privilege language requires a _______________ entry this is in the context of burglary

trespassory

Silence cannot be interpreted as consent. true or false

true

true or false Consent by victim is complete defense but consent induced by fear of violence is void

true

true or false Under causation, defendant only has to be "a" cause, not the "the" cause. (There can be more than 1 but-for cause).

true

true or false Some courts in gendered situation will allow a woman to have a self defense claim if she resorts to deadly force bc that was her only option and she knew she couldn't fight back with her fists.

true But in a normal juris between two men fighting and no big physical difference between them, it wont be a valid self defense claim to use deadly force

1. If purpose of law is more punishment of wrongdoer than regulation of social order, mens rea is required. 2. If penalty is light (fine and no prison), no mens rea requirement. what are the above two factors?

two rules of thumb in figuring out whether offense is strict liability when no mens rea is listed

what is the difference between CL and MPC conspiracy in regard to merger

under CL, does NOT merge with substantive offense under common law but DOES merge under MPC -Meaning someone can be charged with conspiracy of robbing a bank and robbing a bank. -Under MPC, the only time youll have a charge of conspiracy, is before anything else happens (before a murder or robbery happens). -Under CL, you can be charged with both co-conspiracy and a separate crime (robbery/murder)

Youre in a hospital bc of def's conduct and the medical care is reckless or grossly neg. Is this foreseeable or unforeseeable?

unforeseeable and that would cut off def's liability

Is involuntary manslaughter intentional or unintentional

unintentional

is negligent homicide intentional or unintentional?

unintentional

is implied malice intentional or unintentional?

unintentional Does an act that involves a high probability of death with a conscious disregard of human life. "Depraved heart"

is felony murder intentional or unintentional?

unintentional felony murder is a death that occurs during the commission of certain felonies, subject to inherently dangerous felony rule and merger doctrine.

Recklessness manifesting an extreme indifference to human life. name that homicide

unintentional MPC murder

You can never have a accomplice liability for a ______________ crime

unintentional crime

is involuntary manslaughter unintentional or intentional?

unintentional. Its either recklessness or criminal neg

Under MPC, a person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and __________ risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

unjustifiable

Under MPC, a person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and ______________ risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation

unjustifiable

Product test for insanity: an accused is not criminally responsible if his ____________ act was the product of mental disease or mental defect

unlawful

MPC for duress: It is an affirmative defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was coerced to do so by the use of, or a threat to use, _____________ against his person or the person of another, that a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist.

unlawful force

Official interpretation defense (mistake of law) under the MPC: A belief that conduct does not legally constitute an offense is a defense to a prosecution for that offense based upon such conduct when he acts in 1. reasonable reliance 2. 3. afterward determined to be invalid or erroneous, 4. contained in a statute or other enactment.

upon an official statement of the law,

Effectuation of arrest or apprehending the felon by police: what is the modern rule?

use of deadly force in law enforcement limited to forcible or atrocious felonies

only punish someone if there are positive consequences that flow from that. actions are morally right only if they result in desirable consequences. Looking forward

utilitarianism/consequentialist

voluntary manslaughter's MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED): Murder to manslaughter when committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the ___________ of a person in the actor's situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.

viewpoint

causation connects _____________________ with the social harm.

voluntary act

but-for test: actual cause But for the defendant's ___________________________, would the social harm have occurred when it did?

voluntary acts

Under MPC, __________________________ is a defense if it negates an element of the offense.

voluntary intoxication

______________________ can preclude the formation of the mens rea of a specific intent crime but is not a defense to a general intent crime.

voluntary intoxication CL

Step 2: Consider whether it can be bumped up to 1st degree murder, which requires intent to kill + premeditation and deliberation. Or bumped down to ___________________________.

voluntary manslaughter

The 3 approaches to _________________________: 1. Early common law categorical test 2. Modern reasonable person test 3. MPC extreme emotional/mental disturbance test (EMED)

voluntary manslaughter

This homicide should be thought of as mitigating rather than a defense. It doesn't acquit you but just bumps you down from 1st or 2nd degree murder

voluntary manslaughter

This intentional homicide is less than 2nd degree murder. So less of a sentence. Still a felony

voluntary manslaughter

Which homicide normally qualifies as 2nd degree murder, but which is reduced to the lesser crime thru the application of a partial defense

voluntary manslaughter

___________________________ an intentional killing that would normally qualify as 2nd degree murder, but which is reduced to the lesser crime thru the application of a partial defense such as provocation (heat of passion), imperfect self defense, or diminished capacity

voluntary manslaughter

intent to kill in the heat of passion

voluntary manslaughter

there are 5 situations: 1. Aggravated assault or battery 2. Observation of a serious crime against a close relative 3. Illegal arrest (when people would do citizens arrest) 4. Mutual combat 5. Catching one's wife in the act of adultery what are these 5 situations applying to? What homicide?

voluntary manslaughter's categorical test

1. D acted in a heat of passion; 2. Provocation was one of the five things from the categorical test. 3. D did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing; 4. A reasonable person in the D's shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool; and 5. Causal connection between provocation, passion, and the killing These are the elements of which test that belongs to which homicide?

voluntary manslaughter's modern reasonable person test

Mens rea for CL: _________, maliciously, intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently

wilfully

Where the felony has an independent purpose other than to assault the victim, the felony (will/will not) merge with the homicide.

will not felony murder rule can apply here this is the independent felonious purpose test

Under CL's knowledge, Many jurisdictions also allow state to prove/satisfy knowledge through the doctrine of ______________________.

willfull blindness

where a person is deliberately avoiding that knowledge that they have

willfull blindness Many jurisdictions also allow state to prove/satisfy knowledge through this doctrine

Pinkerton Rule Conspirator can be liable for crime committed by another member of the conspiracy even if that other crime was not part of the original agreement as long as unintended crime was: (1) in furtherance of the conspiracy; (2) (3) reasonably foreseeable consequence of the original agreement

within the scope of the conspiracy; or

Can there be more than 1 but-for cause?

yes

if the court finds that the victim did not consent, but the defendant honestly and reasonably believed she did consent, can this be can a defense to rape?

yes

was the person aware of the risk when talking about a person be reckless?

yes whereas with criminal negligence, the person is not aware of the risk but they should've been

Does willful blindness apply to both common law and MPC?

yes for both

Are accidental deaths that occur in the commission of or attempt to commit a felony covered by the felony murder rule?

yes! doesnt matter if its an accident

A child falls in a pool. does the mother have a duty to rescue her child?

yes, Mother has a duty to rescue her child bc of their special relationship (parent/child). If she does not, she may be held criminally liable

can you have premeditation without deliberation?

yes, but you cannot deliberate without premeditating.

When mens rea is not expressed, should it be implied?

yes, unless it falls into one of the exceptions for strict liability crimes.

is forcible rape committed if the female victim consents to an initial penetration by her male companion, and then withdraws her consent during an act of intercourse, but the male continues against her will?

yes, withdrawal of consent effectively nullifies any earlier consent and subjects the male to forcible rape charges if he persists in what has become nonconsensual intercourse.

Let's say you're found not guilty by reason of insanity. You treat your condition by going to a mental institution and they cure you and find you physically fit. Do you have to go prison or are you free?

you get to go free when youre let go

Why is it hard to argue a mistake of law defense?

you had to have been correct at the time you made it and then later on the law changed to make you incorrect, but at the time you relied on it, you would've had to be correct

For attempt, bc you have to have specific intent to kill, attempted murder means "im trying to murder someone" In order to prove this, what must you show?

you have to show that they intended for the victim to die