Class 3: Homicide, Murder, Manslaughter. Flashcards
Define Homicide
Does homicide always entail legal culpability?
What has common law divided criminal homicide into? (two things)
At early common law, homicide was the killing of a human being by a human being.
Homicide by itself is a legally neutral term. Without more, it is not a crime. there are numerous killings that are lawful, like killing at war, self defense etc.
Common law divided criminal homicide into murder and manslaughter.
What does first degree murder require?
Do all jurisdictions require this?
Many jurisdictions reserve first degree murder for cases of
1) premeditation and 2) deliberation
No. Some have changed this to other things. For example, some jurisdictions require prior calculation and design.
Define premeditation and planning
What are the two views to determine whether there is pre-mediation?
Common sense notion suggests a murder planned perhaps with careful or elaborate design. Many jurisdictions require both of the following, both prior planning and consideration of whether to commit the crime
Courts generally focus on pre in premeditation and look for evidence that the defendant deliberated and then formed intention to kill prior to the act of killing.
Two primary views:
- Twinkling of an eye – premeditation can arise in an instant, almost simultaneously with the killing
- Cool reflection – other jurisdictions require some time to elapse between contemplating the killing and carrying it out
Is a sudden killing first degree murder?
No.
At common law, what does murder require?
What does “malice aforethought” mean?
At common law, murder required the killing of another human being by another human being with malice aforethought. Malice is what separates murder from other forms of killing.
“aforethought” means thinking about something before. Modern criminal law has developed aforethought into the term “premeditation” which is below.
What role does malice play in common law murder?
What are the four main things malice means in murder? (Think CAN law, what are some ways the mens rea can be proven for murder)
For common law murder, if a killing is accompanied by the four things malice means, is it a murder?
Malice has a very unique meaning for common law murder.
Malice meant IN MURDER:
1) Intent to kill
2) Intent to inflict grievous bodily injury, resulting in death
3) Reckless indifference to human life (the depraved heart)
4) Felony murder (death resulting from commission or attempted commission of an underlying felony)
If any given killing is accompanied by any of the above, IT IS MURDER. You do not need all of them, but you need at least one of them.
True or False: At common law, all murders were considered the same
( Did not take into account First or second degree murder)
TRUE
Why do they divide murders into degrees?
We divide murders into degrees to distinguish between levels of culpability. The more culpable killers are first degree murderers, and when we go down the list of degrees, we are reducing the level of culpability accordingly.
If a murder is not first degree, then what it is?
Any other form of murder is, often, second-degree murder (or, in some States, third-degree murder).
Under the MPC does murder require malice?
No as the MPC does not recognize malice
Under the MPC, what do they require for murder?
Under the MPC a killing is murder if it is done purposely or knowingly.
We do not need to prove malice under the MPC.
What is implied malice under common law for murder?
Malice is implied if the defendant intends to inflict grievous injury, acts with a depraved heart, or commits felony murder.
What is express malice under common law for murder?
At common law, the intent to kill was a form of express malice.
Under common law, what is premeditation?
What are the two competing views?
Premeditation is developed through common law “aforethought”
1) Twinkling of an eye – premeditation can arise in an instant, almost simultaneously with the killing
2) Cool reflection – other jurisdictions require some time to elapse between contemplating the killing and carrying it out
State v. Carrol
Facts: Got mad at girlfriend and became very angry. He reached up and grabbed the gun and shot her twice in the back of the head. Convicted of first-degree murder. Carroll argues there was no pre-meditation.
Issue: Was there sufficient premeditation for first degree murder?
1) Use the “twinkling of an eye” rule. What does this mean?
2) Apply the above rule to this.
Holding/Analysis:
Court said yes using the twinkling of an eye rule. The law fixes no length of time, and there was deliberation in mere seconds. Regardless of how short it was, there was deliberation.
Ratio: Under the “twinkling of an eye” approach, deliberation and execution can be of mere seconds and can be claimed premeditation.
State v. Guthrie
Facts: Victim and defendant were working together. Victim annoyed Guthrie, and Guthrie becomes enraged and kills victim. He was convicted of first-degree murder which requires premeditation.
Jury was told the premeditation only needed to be there for an instant (twinkling of an eye approach)
Issue: Holding irrelevant
1) Explain the “twinkling of an eye approach”
2) Explain the “cool reflection” approach
3) If the MPC applied, what would be needed?
Holding/Analysis:
1) Twinkling of an eye – premeditation can arise in an instant, almost simultaneously with the killing
2) Cool reflection – other jurisdictions require some time to elapse between contemplating the killing and carrying it out
3) If MPC applied, just intent to kill (aka killing done purposely or knowingly)