Actus Reus 1 Flashcards
First actus reus principle
person should not be convicted solely on basis of thoughts but must also have done a social harm
Second actus reus principle
act must be voluntary
Third actus reus principle
No crim liability for an omission unless person failed to act in an instance where there is a legal duty to act
Fourth actus reus principle
Status crimes are unconstitutional (punish for conduct not for being type of person)
Most crimes in US have four elements
(1) voluntary act or omission when legal duty to act (2) prohibited mental state (3) chain of causation linking defendant actions with social harm (4) concurrence between mens rea and actus reus
Stanley facts
during search officers found obscene films
Stanley holding
1A protects mere private possession of obscene material within one’s own home
Stanley emphasized right to be free from __
unwanted govt intrusions into one’s property
Stanley says 1A protects the right to ____ even if materials obscene so long as ___
receive info and ideas, possession within confines of one’s private home
There was no compelling reason to outweigh Stanley’s privacy interest because ___
no evidence of distribution/selling
No actus reus in Stanley because the govt cannot dictate what a person ___
thinks, reads or watches in privacy of their own home
Stanley court thinks that criminalizing possession of certain materials would unduly ___
intrude on freedom of thought
A volitional act requires ____ and definitely requires more than just __
human agency/acting self, brain activity (not seizure hitting person)
Habitual acts (chain smoker lighting up without thinking about it) are ____
still voluntary
For voluntariness, consciousness is __
a matter of degree
Martin v State facts
officers arrested him at home and then took him onto highway where he engaged in disorderly actions
Martin v. State holding
M punished for involuntary conduct so can’t be upheld
Under Martin, to be convicted for being drunk in public you need to ___
have voluntarily put yourself there
State v. Decina facts
man with history of epilepsy loses consciousness while driving and swerved onto sidewalk killing 4 people
Decina holding
Conduct was voluntary
Under Decina, _______ his failure to consider these renders him criminally liable
aware of condition he knows may produce such consequences
Main difference between Martin and Decina
wide vs. narrow time-framing construct
Counterargument why Martin should be voluntary
voluntary act 1 (beating his wife) causes act 2 (public drunkenness) and is foreseeable in wider timeframe, probability of epileptic blackout lower than probability ending up in public after behavior likely to gain police attention
Seminal though case
Stanley v. Georgia
Involuntary conduct cases
Martin and Decina
Status cases
Robinson and Powell
Robinson facts
Police found scar tissue and needle marks on arm. Denied taking drugs and said from military service
Robinson statute
to be under influence of or addicted to drugs
Robinson statute did not require ___
use or possession
Robinson holding
SCOTUS says this violates the 8A, cruel and unusual punishment
Robinson reasoning
Addiction is an illness and punishment for having a disease is cruel
Powell facts
chronic alcoholic charged with being drunk in public
Powell holding
being drunk in public not a status
Why doesn’t Robinson apply in Powell
(1) Unlike P, R was arrested merely for addiction not criminal conduct, being drunk in public (2) If Robinson applied where to draw the line?
Powell dissent
Like Robinson no control over behavior. Once drunk would appear in public without volition, under compulsion of disease of chronic alcoholism
Powell White concurrence
Maybe some cases where drunkenness a status but here he failed to show necessary actions (omission crime)
To be an omission crime must ___ + ___
cause social harm, mens rea
Criminal liability can be based on omission if defendant ___
had legal duty to act and was capable of acting, but did not
5 situations where legal duty to act
(1) personal relationship (2) contractual duty (3) statutory duty to act (4) defendant created risk to victim (5) defendant voluntarily assumes care of someone in need
What are two dimensions of capable to act?
physically capable + known the facts giving rise to need for action
If mother in a lake and does not know the daughter is drowning five feet away then she is ____
not liable for failure to rescue
Beardsley facts
affair with woman who overdosed. Knew she was in a stupor and asked assistant to move her to the movement. She died
Beardsley holding
No legal duty here
Beardsley reasoning
(1) moral duty not the same as legal duty (2) not husband and wife (3) more like a houseguest (no duties) than a wife
Erb facts
Met woman for first time that day and drove to mother’s house. She used heroin and passed out. He didn’t know where she lived so he left her on a lawn and she died
Erb holding
No legal duty
Erb reasoning
(1) No criminal liability based on failure to act unless legal duty (2) He didn’t create the peril, she supplied and injected herself with the drug (3) didn’t know her, no special relationship
Ibeagwa facts
two young unsupervised children drowned in a pool. mother was notified by a neighbor that they were unsupervised while she was at work
Ibeagwa holding
can be liable, conduct showed conscious disregard for consequence of leaving young children unsupervised
Ibeagwa reasoning
(1) omissions can be actus reus when legal duty present (2) special parental relationship (3) knew unsupervised
Kuntz facts
K and long term partner had altercation. She stabbed him later claiming self defense. didn’t call for medical assistance after stabbing him
Kuntz holding 1
Yes legal duty based on relationship + creating peril
Kuntz holding 2
but when justifiably use force to fend off aggressor, no duty to assist in any way that conceivably creates risk of injury
American bystander rule
no legal duty on a person to rescue or summon aid for another person at risk
Kuntz qualification
Legal duty to act may attach once person is safe but only if (1) prosecutor can show knowledge of facts indicating duty to act AND (2) person physically capable of performing the act
Lindaman facts
required to register as sex offender but didn’t
Lindaman holding
Statutory duty to register so appropriate to convict for omission
Bajakajian facts
traveled internationally with 350K and failed to report so forced to forfeit the money
Bajakajian holding
Allowed forfeiture because money involved in crime but reduced the forfeiture to 15K and fined 5K
Bajakajian reasoning
(1) full amount would violate 8A excessive fines clause (2) forfeiture of 350 grossly disproportionate to seriousness of the crime
Smith v. State facts
high school principal didn’t report sex crime on campus for four hours
Smith holding
Statute not unconstitutionally vague
Smith reasoning
(1) statute doesn’t define immediate but dictionary provides sufficient clarity (2) before reporting conducted own investigation and performed unrelated tasks (3) irrelevant that unaware that student-on-student rape constituted child abuse
Why did dictionary provide sufficient clarity in Smith?
Statute doesn’t need exclusive time limit, immediately means prompty without intervening events or delays (not 24 hours)
Smith’s own investigation contradicted the ___ AND __
plain meaning of immediate, undermines purpose of protecting children in the statute
Why is it irrelevant that Smith didn’t know student on student rape constituted child abuse?
mandatory reporters could avoid liability by simply refusing to learn statutory definitions
Park facts
P cited for violating FDA sanitation regs. P was Pres and COO of Acme Foods. FDA had sent him two letters regarding unsanitary conditions in the warehouses
Park holding
corporate officers can be held criminally liable when he had the ability to prevent the occurrence or correct it after the fact
Park reasoning
(1) conceded that providing sanitary condition something responsible for (2) only way corporation can act is through individuals on its behalf (3) requirements stringent but no more so than public right to expect of those who voluntarily assume positions of authority
Osborne facts
four explicit photos of a minor found in his home
Osborne holding
Freedoms of 1A can be limited if govt strong enough interest -> Ohio can prohibit possession of child porn given gravity of interest in this context
What is the govt interest in Osborne
protecting children from exploitation and victimization through resharing of explicit images
How is Osborne distinct from Stanley
interest of protecting children/targeting child porn market more compelling that GA wanting to keep minds pure
Possession ___ the act requirement
satisfies
Is possession really a way of ____?
criminalizing bad thoughts
Page facts
found oxy she acquired through old prescription. State said felony because possessed drug outside timeframe of intended use
Page holding
person doesn’t violate the statute because they fail to take medication as prescribed
Page reasoning
(1) valid prescription exception to possession statute (2) remains valid after prescription ends (3) defendant burden to prove valid prescription and then state must prove prescription invalid
Possession cases
Page, Osborne
Why criminalize possession?
(1) destroy the market (2) proxy offense (assumption someone carrying drugs up to no good)
Criminalizing possession satisfies the act requirement when ___ or ___
you acquired it, failed to get rid of it (omission offense)
Arguments for criminalizing revenge porn
(1) empirical connection between non-consensual porn and societal harm (2) need to destroy market through people who possess it (3) need criminalization to show moral condemnation
Why does the Revenge Porn article suggest Stanley wrongly decided?
(1) certain possession of obscene material should be criminalized (2) maybe all adult porn should be since no method to verify consent
Mitchell facts
Black man upset after watching movie where black boy beat by white man so he instigated friends to beat up white boy walking past
Mitchell holding
Court can consider associations/beliefs when determining what sentence IF abstract beliefs motivate conduct
Mitchell reasoning
(1) physical assault not “expressive conduct protected by 1A” (2) differentiates between thought crime and sentence enhancement (3) crimes motivated by racial bias deserve enhanced penalties because those crimes are more harmful to victims and society
