Actus Reus - culpability, acts and omissions Flashcards
MPC 2.01
Voluntary Act Requirement
- A person is not guilty of an offence unless his liability is based on conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act of which he is physically capable.
- The following ARE NOT voluntary acts under the MPC:
- A reflex or convulsion,
- A bodily movement during unconciousness or sleep,
- Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion, or
- A bodily movement that otherwise if not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual
Martin v. State
Criminal liability may only be imposed when the criminal acts are committed voluntarily.
- Police arrested Martin at his home for being drunk and disorderly, took him on to a public highway where he continued to swear etc, then they charged him with using loud and profane language whist being drunk in a public place.
- Act of being on the highway WAS NOT VOLUNTARY, he was taken there against his will.
People v. Low
Where a person has ample opportunity to avoid committing a prohibited act by voluntarily relinquishing drugs in his possession, this omission satisfies the actus reus requirement.
- Defendant was arrested for driving a stolen vehicle and taken to jail where cops found drugs on him, he was charged with bringing a controlled substance into the jail.
- Court rejects a defence based on Martin
State v. Barnes
The necessary voluntary act requirement is satisfied by knowingly possessing the controled substance.
- Same as Low, taken to jail for a crime and then they found drugs on him.
State v. Eaton
Contrast with Low and Barnes. Court rules that when you have no choice but to surrender drugs upon an arrest that would lead to conviction of another crime, there is no choice at all. Court refuses to read voluntariness into the statute. Eaton did not voluntarily bring the drugs into the jail.
Why have a voluntary act requirement?
- Fundamental that in a civilized society we don’t punish thoughts alone,
- Involuntary movements cannot be deterred with punishment, nor can it stimulate actions which physically cannot be performed,
- Sense of security would be undermined in society where such movement or inactivity could lead to formal social considerations,
- People whose involuntary movements threaten harm to others may present a public health or safety issue calling for therapy or a custodial commitment, but they do not present problems of correction, and
- Involuntary acts are not morally blameworthy
- Value autonomy and the right to change one’s minds.
- Serious proof problems.
MPC
Habitual action
Voluntary or involuntary
2.01(2)(d)
Habitual action done without thought or regard is considered VOLUNTARY. Why?
- Although it is difficult to cease, you can stop habitual action through the threat of punishment.
- Not a reflex
Cogdon Case
Act committed whilst in a state of somnambulism are considered INVOLUNTARY.
- Mother that killed her daughter with an axe whilst sleepwalking.
- Had, had nightmares before about killing,
- Suffered from hysteria and depression.
- act of killing was not regarded as an act itself by law
People v. Decina
A persons movements during an epileptic seizure ARE INVOLUNTARY; HOWEVER, liability can be established by pointing to earlier acts or omissions that were voluntary
- When one possesses the knowledge that he suffers from epileptic seizures, choosing to drive and thus taking the risk that the behaviour could lead to harm to others, counts as a voluntary act that satisfies the actus reus requirement.
MPS 2.01 (4)
Possession
Possession is an act . . . IF:
- the possessor KNOWINGLY procured or received the thing possessed, OR,
- Was AWARE of his conduct thereof FOR A SUFFICIENT PERIOD to have been able to terminate his possession.
Possession IS AN ACT. You MUST have KNOWLEDGE and CONTROL under the MPC, but contrast with State v. Bradshaw
State v. Bradshaw
Awareness is not necessary for possession.
- Commercial trucker drove across the Canadian border into Washington driving a large, semi-trailer upon which someone had hidden 77 pounds of marijuana. Court convicted DESPITE Bradshaw being unaware of the cargo.
- Deterrence aim. Court wants to create a duty for truckers to know what is in their cargo.
Jones v. US
A person CANNOT be convicted of an omission, when they have NO LEGAL DUTY to the victim.
- Baby was placed with the defendant who was a family friend. Defendant had the means to provide food and medical care to the child but did not and the child died. Court held she had NO LEGAL DUTY to the child and her conviction was overturned.
4 Legal Situations where omission = culpability
- statute imposes duty of care
- status relationship
- contractual duty of care
- voluntary assumption of care AND prevention of others from rendering aid
Status Relationships
Parents
Spouses
Siblings
Adult children
Parents
- HAVE A DUTY to aid and protect their MINOR children,
- NO DUTY to aid and protect their ADULT children unless adult child has a disability
Spouses
- DUTY to aid each other,
Siblings
- NO DUTY to aid each other
Adult Children
- NO DUTY to elderly parents unless adult child has assumed that responsibility
People v. Beardsley
NO LEGAL DUTY for a man to aid his mistress.
- Man was having an affair with a woman in his house whilst his wife was away. The mistress od’d on morphine and he failed to call an ambulance.
People v. Carrol
A person who acts as the functional equivalent of a parent in a familial or household setting IS LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE for the childs care.
- Stepmother was charged with child endangerment for failing to prevent her husband from killing his daughter whilst she stayed with them.
USE CARROL FOR LEGAL STEP-PARENTS
