Crim Flashcards
In order for a defendant to be guilty of a crime, the ___________ has the burden of producing evidence, and of persuading the factfinder _______________, of the following essential elements: (1) _________ (actus reus) — the defendant committed a voluntary act or ______ when there was a ______ duty to act); (2) ________ (mens rea) — the defendant had a culpable mental state as specified in the definition of the offense; (3) _________ — the defendant’s requisite mental state existed at the time the voluntary act or omission took place; AND (4) _________ — the defendant’s voluntary act or omission was the _____ and _______ cause of the ______ specified in the definition of the offense.
In order for a defendant to be guilty of a crime, the prosecution has the burden of producing evidence, and of persuading the factfinder beyond a reasonable doubt, of the following essential elements: (1) physical act (actus reus) — the defendant committed a voluntary act or omission when there was a legal duty to act); (2) mental state (mens rea) — the defendant had a culpable mental state as specified in the definition of the offense; (3) concurrence — the defendant’s requisite mental state existed at the time the voluntary act or omission took place; AND (4) causation — the defendant’s voluntary act or omission was the actual and proximate cause of the harm specified in the definition of the offense.
An involuntary act will not satisfy the actus reus requirement unless:
(1) D is aware that they have a condition that can result in involuntary actions; and
(2) fails to take reasonable steps to prevent such actions
Generally, an omission (a failure to act) is NOT criminal UNLESS:
(1) D had a legal duty to act;
(2) D had knowledge of facts concerning the duty to act;
AND
(3) it was reasonably possible for the D to act.
A legal duty to act arises by:
(a) A contract duty,
(b) parent-child relationship,
(c) a duty taken on voluntarily,
(d) a statute that creates a duty,
OR
(e) where the defendant creates the danger.
What are the CL mental states?
- Specific Intent
- General Intent
- Malice
- Strict Liability
Specific intent crimes typically require that the defendant __________ commit an act and __________ intend to bring about a _______ result when committing that act. Specific intent must always be ________; never ________.
Specific intent crimes typically require that the defendant intentionally commit an act and subjectively intend to bring about a certain result when committing that act. Specific intent must always be proven; never inferred.
Crimes against person: assault and first-degree murder
Crimes against property: robbery, embezzlement, burglary, larceny, forgery, false pretenses
Incomplete crimes: solicitation, attempt, conspiracy
Crimes against person: (1) _______ and (2) ____________
Crimes against property: (1) ________, (2) _________, (3) __________, (4) _________, (5) _______, (6) __________
Incomplete crimes: (1) _________, (2) ________, (3) __________
General intent crime only requires that the defendant ________ to commit an act that is prohibited by law. The defendant must be __________ of his actions and any _______ _________ . Intent to accomplish the act’s wrongful result is _________. General intent may be ______ from the act itself.
General intent crime only requires that the defendant intend to commit an act that is prohibited by law. The defendant must be aware of his actions and any attendant circumstances. Intent to accomplish the act’s wrongful result is irrelevant. General intent may be inferred from the act itself.
General Intent Crimes
BRIK
battery, rape, false imprisonment, kidnapping
Malice crimes require that the defendant act with ________ ________ or undertake an _________ risk, from which a _________ __________ is expected
Malice crimes require that the defendant act with reckless disregard or undertake an obvious risk, from which a harmful result is expected
Malice Crimes
MAlice Crimes
Murder other than first-degree (CL Murder, 2nd Degree)
Arson
Strict liability crimes - only require that the defendant voluntarily commits the ____ ____. There is no _______________ requirement for strict liability crimes. Defenses that negate _____________ (e.g., mistake of fact) are not available for strict liability crimes.
Strict liability crimes only require that the defendant voluntarily commits the actus reus. There is no mental state/mens rea requirement for strict liability crimes. Defenses that negate state of mind (e.g., mistake of fact) are not available for strict liability crimes.
Strict Liability Crimes Include:
SS
Small crimes (regulatory, admin, morality crimes)
and
Statutory rape
MPC Mental States
- Purposefully (subjective)
- Knowingly (subjective)
- Recklessly (subjective)
- Criminal Negligence (objective)
Under the MPC, when does a person act purposefully?
A person acts purposefully (intentionally) if he acts with the intent that his action causes a certain result. In other words, the defendant undertakes his action either intending for, or hoping that, a certain result will follow.
Under the MPC, when does a person act knowingly?
A person acts knowingly if he is aware that his conduct will result in certain consequences. In other words, a person acts knowingly if he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause a specific result.
Willful Blindness Standard -
A ________ of states use the Willful Blindness Standard, wherein a person can be deemed to act ____________ when he: (a) _________________________; OR (b) _______________________.
A ____________ of jurisdictions reject the willful blindness standard, and require _____________. In such a jurisdiction, knowledge may be proved by _____________ evidence
Willful Blindness Standard -
A majority of states use the Willful Blindness Standard, wherein a person can be deemed to act knowingly when he: (a) is aware that certain facts are highly probable; OR (b) is intentionally ignorant to certain facts.
A minority of jurisdictions reject the willful blindness standard, and require actual knowledge. In such a jurisdiction, knowledge may be proved by circumstantial evidence
Under the MPC, when does someone act recklessly?
A person acts recklessly if: (1) he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a certain result would occur; AND (2) the action is a gross deviation from how a reasonable law-abiding person would act.
A person who creates such a risk, but is unaware of it solely because of voluntary intoxication, also acts recklessly
Under the MPC, when does someone act with criminal negligence?
A person acts with criminal negligence if: (1) he should have been aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk; AND (2) that failure to perceive the risk is a gross deviation from what a reasonable prudent person would observe in similar circumstances.
What is the difference between recklessness and criminal negligence?
Although the level of risk is the same for both recklessness and negligence, the difference between the two is that with recklessness, the actor must be aware of the risk involved with her actions, whereas, for negligence, the actor is not aware of the risks but should have known what those risks were.
Superseding Intervening Cause - A third party’s act will break the chain of causation if the act was:
(1) independent of the defendant’s wrongful conduct;
and
(2) not foreseeable (it was so out-of-the-ordinary that it is not fair to hold the defendant criminally responsible).
Simultaneous Acts Rule
A person’s act will still be the proximate cause of a resulting injury if his wrongful conduct created a condition of peril, even if later negligent events combined to cause the injury (so long as the later events are foreseeable).
Similarly, a defendant’s wrongful act that accelerates death is still the legal cause of death, even if the person was going to die eventually
Merger
If a defendant commits a single act that meets the elements of two offenses, the lesser offense will “merge” with the greater offense and drop out, such that the defendant will only be charged with the greater offense. Crimes that don’t merge can be charged simultaneously.
Transferred intent is used when _____________________________________________________. The D’s intent ____________________________ and can be used to satisfy the ________ element of the crime that the D is being charged with. The transferred intent doctrine is only used for _________ crimes, and is not used for __________ crimes.
Transferred intent only applies to:
- homicide
- battery
- arson
Transferred intent is used when a D intends to harm one person, but then unintentionally harms a second person instead. The D’s intent transfers from the intended target to the actual victim and can be used to satisfy the mens rea element of the crime that the D is being charged with. The transferred intent doctrine is only used for completed crimes, and is not used for attempted crimes.
Transferred intent only applies to:
- homicide
- battery
- arson
What is an inchoate offense?
A crime of preparing for or seeking to commit another crime
What are the incoate offenses and their merger status?
- Attempt (merges)
- Solicitation (merges)
- Conspiracy (doesn’t merge)
Solicitation
(1) requests another person to commit a crime or join in the commission of a crime;
(2) with the specific intent that the crime be committed;
AND
(3) the other person receives the request.
No defenses once the solicitation is complete. However MPC/some states recognize renunciation as an affirmative defense (D must voluntarily renounce + prevent the commission)
Attempt
In most states, a person is guilty of attempt if the person:
(1) had the specific intent to commit a crime;
AND
(2) took an overt act sufficiently beyond mere preparation.
Most states and the Model Penal Code - require that the overt act be a “substantial step” toward the completion of that crime.
CL - uses the words “dangerously close” to the crime
A minority of states - require that the overt act be “proximate” or “dangerously proximate” to the crime.
Conspiracy
(1) an express or implied agreement between two or more people;
(2) intent to enter into the agreement;
(3) intent to pursue an unlawful objective (note: at CL this element would be required to be met by ALL parties of the agreement, while the modern trend & MPC only require it to be met by ONE party);
AND
(4) the commission of an overt act in furtherance of the unlawful objective (note: under CL no overt act was required).
Conspiracy w/ a Member from Protected Class
A member of a protected class cannot be a co-conspirator to commit a crime designed to protect that class.