Crim Flashcards
Δ is drunk driving and collides with another driver, who dies as a result of the collision. If prosecuted for manslaughter, Δ’s best chance for acquittal would be based on an argument that
(A) the other driver was contributorily negligent
(B) the collision would have occurred even if Δ had not been intoxicated
(C) Δ lacked the requisite mens rea due to intoxication
(D) driving while intoxicated requires no mens rea and so cannot be the basis for misdemeanor manslaughter
Correct answer: (B)
Explanation: If the accident would have happened even if Δ hadn’t been intoxicated, Δ’s recklessness in being intoxicated wouldn’t have caused the killing.
In order to be guilty of manslaughter, there must be concurrence of the elements. It isn’t enough to show that Δ caused the death and that Δ was also reckless or grossly negligent. Δ’s recklessness or negligence must itself cause the killing.
(A) is wrong because contributory negligence is a tort doctrine, and has no role in criminal liability.
