Actor and Act Flashcards
What is the CL definition of insanity?
M’Naughten Rule, focusing on cognitive disability says D is insane if:
(1) At the time of the criminal act,
(2) he was laboring under such a defect of reason, arising from a disease of the mind, that he
(a) did not know the nature and quality of the act that he was doing; or
(b) if he did know it, he did not know that what he was doing was wrong
What is the Durham Test?
Looks to whether unlawful act was a product of mental disease/defect but quickly became untenable; too big a can of worms
How does the MPC treat the insanity defense?
D is not responsible if,
(1) as a result of mental disease/defect,
(2) D lacks substantial capacity [not all-or-nothing test] to
(a) appreciate [not know] the criminality of his conduct or
(b) conform his conduct to the law [takes care of irresistible impulse]
*Now the majority tests, allowing the jury to operate
Who has the burden of proving the insanity defense?
There is a presumption of sanity unless D gives notice of insanity defense and brings in some evidence to the contrary. Once introduced as a defense, the burden of proof differs by JD
Who is generally subject to being civilly committed?
State may have statutes to civilly commit sexual offenders who due to mental abnormality or personality order are likely to commit predatory acts of sexual violence
How does the CL treat the mistake of fact defense?
No general doctrine of mistake of fact; depends on the type of crime committed (e.g. courts do not accept mistaken consent as defense to rape; mistakenly taking umbrella may be defense to theft).
Deliberately avoiding knowing something is not a defense (e.g. drug runners)
*“Act at your own peril” (e.g. in aiding 3d parties, statutory rape, bigamy) discourages all forms of the conduct (i.e. society sees no benefit in men having sex with 12 yr old girls that look like they are 20, so no reason to protect mistakes)
How long can an actor be civilly committed?
The state commit him until such time as the person’s mental abnormality has changed to make him safe to society at large (although such commitment is likely to be indefinite)
How does the CL treat the mistake of law defense?
a) Ignorance of the law is no excuse is the general rule, but not always applicable
b) Law not as interested in catching someone who in good faith tries to follow the law, but has less sympathy for D operating at the margin of what is legally permissible
c) Prosecutor’s discretion also acts as a buffer
(d) It is constitutionally permissible to make conduct criminal that is not the fault of the actor (strict criminal liability); usually occurs in the case of company CEOs
How does the MPC treat the mistake of law defense?
MPC excuses mistake of law in cases where D relies on official statement of the law:
(a) statute,
(b) judicial decision,
(c) administrative order, or
(d) official interpretation by public body charged with interpreting it
What is the CL definition of an attempt?
An act done with intent to commit a crime, and tending but failing to effect its commission
Tending = taking a substantial step toward commission of the offense
*There is no crime of attempt, must attempt something; occasionally courts find that extreme recklessness gives rise to an attempt (but quite a stretch)
What are the factors to consider in deciding if an attempt has occurred?
a) Nature of the act: despite certainty of the criminal intention, D must have committed some substantial harm
b) Manifestation of criminal intent: act must unequivocally manifest an existing intention to go forward to completion
c) How much has been done: “substantial step”
d) How much remains to be done: act must be in “dangerous proximity” to the criminal end to be attained
e) Likelihood crime will be committed: must go so far that end would result unless frustrated by extraneous circumstances
f) Opportunity to desist: conduct must pass the point where most men with the same intent as D would have thought better and desisted
g) Temporal/Spatial proximity: enters largely into the calculus of whether the actual transaction has been commenced or not
How does the CL treat the impossibility defense?
a) Legal impossibility is generally a defense
b) Factual impossibility is not a defense
*Some situations fall somewhere in the middle (e.g. D buys baby powder instead of cocaine; factual impossibility = powder was baby powder not cocaine; legal impossibility = buying baby powder is not a crime)
What is the renunciation defense?
MPC - It is an affirmative defense that D abandoned his effort to commit a crime or otherwise prevented its commission, under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of the criminal purpose
When is renunciation involuntary?
Renunciation is not voluntary if it is motivated by inc. likelihood of failure or being caught
What is the CL definition of a conspiracy?
A meeting of the minds of 2 or more people; no temporal element (like attempt)
- Must infer such a meeting of the minds from Ds’ actions usually
- Rare, but one can conspire to commit an unlawful but not criminal act (e.g. antitrust violation)
