Causation

Question 1

Two guys offer to drive drunk guy home so they can steal his money. After stealing his money, making him remove his clothes, and not giving him his glasses back, they kick him out of the car in 0 degree weather. He is later hit by a truck and killed.

Answer 1

People v. Kibbe

• D’s are guilty of crime when their conduct was a cause of death sufficently direct to meet the requirement of criminal law.
  
  • Ultimate harm does not need to be intended, but must be something foreseeable as reasonably related to the acts of the accused.

Question 2

Guy rapes and beats 85 year old woman. She later becomes depressed and refuses to eat. She dies after being fed too much food thorugh a tube in nursing home.

Liable for FM?

Answer 2

• An act is a cause of an event if
  
  • (1)the event would not have occured without the act (but for)
  • (2) enhancement of the likelhood that the class of events would occur.

Question 3

Intervening Causes

Answer 3

• Factors to consider
  
  • De minimus contribution - When the conduct itself is trivial to the intervening cause. Punch B, then he goes to hospital and gets struck by lightning.
  • Foreseeablity
    
    • (1) Dependent intervening causes
      
      • an act or event that occurs in response to the Ds action.
        
        • usually does not release D from liability unless abnormal, and thus unforseeable.
          
          • Medical malpractice if not grossly negligent.
    • (2)Independent intervening causes
      
      • Force that does not occur in response to the D’s action.
        
        • relieves D of liability unless it is foreseeable.
    • (3)Intended Conseuqense doctrine
      
      • A volantary act intended to bring about what in fact happens :”intended consequenses can never be too remote”.

Question 5

D robs McDs - police officers arrive - D escapes to the roof - officer follows D to roof, falls down air shaft and dies

Answer 5

• People v. Matos
• But for causation: But for the robbery of McDs, officer wouldnt have been on roof
• Sufficiently direct cause:

Question 6

Causation args

Answer 6

• Defendant’s action was a sufficiently direct cause of death
  
  • People v. Kibbe Left man naked on highway with no glasses in zero degree weather; was hit by truck - left helplessly intoxicated man to freeze to death, had no choice but to try and get to safety via highway
  • Brackett v. Peters Enough if act was one of the causes - rape made old lady’s death more likely to occur.
  • Commonwealth v. Cassanova Modern medical science can determine causation no matter how long after the fact
  • People v. Stewart Stomach hernia case, use for anything short of gross negligence
  • People v. Vaughn Angel of Mercy case = initial perpertrator can’t escape just because someone relieves them from artificial life support
    *

Question 7

Old Lady Case, Hernia Case Cocaine Case vs. Bald tire police chase

Answer 7

In the first three cases, there was causation because the intervening causes were not the “sole” cause of the death and the acts set the chain of events in motion. However, in the bald tire case the court looked at the surrounding circumstances and found the D not liable.

Question 8

Intervening causes rules

Answer 8

(1) has to be the sole cause to become a superceding cause.
(2) Has to be actual contributory cause of death in the sense that they forged a link in the chain of causes the actually brough about the death (Sufficently direct)
* robbing mcdonalds, cop falling down air shaft, leaving someone on side of road, and suicide.