Conduct (Actus Reus)

Question 1

There must be some act in order for a crime to be committed

Answer 1

1. A voluntary act that causes social harm
   
   1. An act is a bodily movement, a muscular contraction
2. A person is not guilty of a crime unless her conduct includes a voluntary act
   
   1. Cannot be guilty of a crime based on mere status or thoughts alone
3. Martin v. State
   
   1. “Any person who while intoxicated or drunk, appears in any public place where one or more persons are present, and manifests a drunken condition by boisterous or indecent conduct or loud or profane discourse, is guilty of a crime”
   2. D was arrested while drunk at home, and the police took him to the highway
   3. This was considered to be a non-voluntary act
      
      1. Voluntary act: something that involves the use of your mind
      2. A voluntary act is something very narrow, but can also be viewed as no act at all
   4. The statute seems to require boisterous conduct for D to be guilty

Question 2

Unconsciousness

Answer 2

Unconsciousness is a complete defense in CA

If you are unconscious while you commit the crime, you are not guilty

Question 3

Unconsciousness:

People v. Newton

Answer 3

1. Newton shot and killed one officer, shot a second officer, kidnapped a motorist, and was shot in the process
2. Two ways for the charge to be lessened to manslaughter
   
   1. Provocation
      
      1. Must prove that the victim provoked him
      2. If D can prove self-defense, he is not guilty
   2. Diminished capacity
      
      1. D has a reduced or impaired capacity to intent to kill
      2. If D can prove unconsciousness or insanity, he is not guilty
3. The judge failed to instruct the jury on self-defense or unconsciousness
4. If D can meet the test of insanity, they are admitted to an insane hospital; if they are unconscious, it is like no act at all

Question 4

Unconciousness:

People v. Decing

Answer 4

1. “A person who operates or drives any vehicle of any kind in a reckless or culpably negligent manner whereby a human being is killed is punishable by 2-5 years”
2. D claims he was unconscious while driving, but this is not a defense because he was aware of the condition prior to the incident
   
   1. He was prone to seizures, so as soon as he started driving, he was being reckless or negligent
3. One must have the mens rea that is required at the time they have the actus reus that is required
   
   1. One can be unconscious at the moment of harm but still liable because they acted voluntarily and had the required mens rea before that moment
4. Must look at the social value of taking the risk

Question 5

Failure to Act

Answer 5

1. There are many crimes that require a failure to do something
2. Just because an actus reus is required, there doesn’t have to be an actual act, it can be a failure to act

Question 6

Failure to Act:

Jones v. United States

Answer 6

1. D is charged with involuntary manslaughter when 10-month old child dies from malnutrition
2. D did not do anything affirmative to hurt the child, but caused the death by failing to act
   
   1. Had a moral duty to care for the child
3. However, everybody who has a moral duty doesn’t necessarily have a legal duty and is therefore not criminally liable
4. A person can be held criminally liable when:
   
   1. Statute imposes duty
      
      1. “A person who knows that another is exposed to grave physical harm shall, to the extent that the same can be rendered without danger or peril to himself or without interference with important duties owed to others, give reasonable assistance to the exposed person unless that assistance or care is being provided by others”
   2. Certain status relationships
      
      1. Parent to minor child, spouse to spouse, captain to crew and passengers, bartender to inebriated customer
   3. Contractual duty to care
   4. Assumption of care and seclusion of victim
   5. Instigating the danger of harm, even if by accident (Commonwealth v. Cali)
      
      1. It’s only when you have created the risk when you have the special duty of care

Question 7

Failure to Act:

Barber v. Superior Court

Answer 7

1. Decedent underwent surgery and was left in a comatose state afterwards
2. In CA, if you wish not to be kept alive, you must put it in writing, which the decedent did not
   
   1. He only verbally told his wife he would not want to be kept alive on a machine
3. When the doctors took him off the life support machine, it was an omission
   
   1. If they had done an affirmative act, that would have constituted murder
   2. If it can be called an omission, it is easier to let the doctors off the hook