Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Law school subjects > Crim class > Flashcards

Crim class Flashcards

1
Q

Criminal code protects us by

A

Deterrence: reason for criminal codes
Moral influence: teach citizens right & wrong
Incapacitation: reduce abiltiy to do wrong
Rehabilitation: “fix” potential wrongdoers
Retribution: offenders deserve punishment/suffering: not utilitarian - not about benefit but doing what’s right

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Elements for Criminal codes

A

Conduct: describes specific act req. For the crime: most codes don’t focus on conduct
Result: req. For the crime: most codes focus on this

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Both conduct & result is actus reas

A

Attendant Circum.: circumstance req. For the crime - selling drugs near school
Mental state: thinking/ attitude for crime : “mens rea”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Mental state elements

A

Person is guilty of criminal attempt if he purposefully takes a substantial step toward commision of a crime

A person is guilty of murder if she tells another person with malice aforethough

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

MPC section 202: Gen req. Of culpability

A

Minimum req. Of culp. Except as provided in Section 2.05 person isn’t guilty of an offense unless he acted purposefully, knowingly, recklessly or negligently- law may require respect to each material element of the offense

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Kinds of Culpability: highest one is the worst

A

Purpose, Knowledge, Recklessness, Negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Purpose: want. Person acts purposefully with respect to a material element of an offense when:

A

An element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof its his conscious object(purposeful: if its your goal/desire) to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result & if th element involved the attendant circumstances he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Awareness

A

A person acts knowingly with respect to a material element of an offense when: element involves the nature of his conduct of the attendant circumstances he is aware that his conduct is that nature or that such circumstances exist & element involves a result of his conduct( look at conduct deeper, just b/c they did it doesn’t mean they know they did) he is aware that its practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Recklessness

A

person acts reckless w/ respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards (aware you have a risk: Prosecution has to prove person has knowledge of risk & disregards it) a substantial ( know that something bad will happen)(magnitude of harm that might result & probability) & unjustifiable risk( when there isn’t a reason for why you posed the risk against another’s life) that the material element exists or will result from a conduct. The risk must be such a nature & degree that considering the nature & purpose of conduct & circumstances knowing disregards a gross deviation from standard conduct that a good citizen would observe in that person’s situation ( most substantial risks aren’t justified)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Negligence

A

should be aware of substantial & unjustifiable risk. Gross deviation from standard of care to act as RP: should have known & gross deviation from reasonableness: harder to prove than Tort law: only to pay in Tort with criminal law its higher in negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Homicide:

A

the defendant killed another person
All homicides have the same act element: result element
Differ in the mental state and attendant circumstances or b/c of special defense applies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

types of homicide

A

Murder
Manslaughter
Negligent Homicide

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

murder elements

A

Act: killing
Mental: malice aforethought:

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

4 kinds of malice aforethough/ 4 dif kinds of murder:

A

intent to kill

extremely recklessness aka depraved indifference

intent to inflict serious bodily harm (seriously hurt someone but didn’t expect them to die)

kill in course of a felony ”felony murder” (committing felony and you killed someone)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Intent to Kill: desire/ purpose to kill/murder

A

Mental state: malice aforethought

Very hard to prove someone’s mental thoughts: but you can get around it by confessions

Permissible inferences: deadly weapon rule or natural and probable consequence: jury is permitted to infer that def did something that has natural and probable consequence of death: like pushing someone off a 500 ft ledge like the grand canyon

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Intent to Kill: desire/ purpose to kill/murder

A

Mental state: malice aforethought

Very hard to prove someone’s mental thoughts: but you can get around it by confessions

Permissible inferences: deadly weapon rule or natural and probable consequence: jury is permitted to infer that def did something that has natural and probable consequence of death: like pushing someone off a 500 ft ledge like the grand canyon

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

premeditation

A

when considering 1st or 2nd degree: premeditation is the Guthrie (appellate court) approach: willful, deliberate (period of time before the killing- the person is reflecting on the plan to kill) (which would then qualify for one as premeditating) & premeditated

OR pennsylvania/Caroll approach: if you had intent to kill at any time then the jury can find premeditated (trial approach)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

1st Degree Murder

A

Premeditated
May qualify for the death penalty
“Felony murder”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

2nd Degree Murder

A

Not premeditated
Gives you life in prison

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

manslaughter

A

Intentional killing in the heat of passion
Crime will be reduced to this is a defendant has a defense of provocation
Killer has intention to kill

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Constitutes manslaughter when (MPC defense)

A

Extreme mental or emotional disturbance/ EMED: look at intense anger or bizarre conduct

Reasonable explanation or excuse : for the emotional disturbance/ REE( have to show a reason for why the person is disturbed)

Def can make a plea in mitigation to jury in hope that they show empathy -

Provocation not required under EMED defense ( there isn’t any provoker sometimes - jury can give person defense based on person’s delusions)

No cooling time limitation
No exceptions to this: def could plead that mere words lead to EMED
Defense is available for killings of non-provoking 3rd parties

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Provocation Defense: CL approach

A

Has to be in Heat of passion: feelings of the defendant at the time of the incident - not speculative: had to be their actual emotions : wild and overwhelming feelings

Had an Adequate provocation: has to be experiencing passionate emotion and had to: 5 recognized categories: adultery, injury to a loved one, battery, mutual combat, illegal arrest : use RP approach and see if the provocation would inflame the passions of a RP (see would a person feel overwhelming emotion) (reluctant to subjectify the RP standard) (individualization only occurs by age like children & looking at children of same age, looking also at the gender and using RP) (can’t take in account personal experiences to prior incident and psychological experiences before the event took place, or cultural background)

Cooling time had not elapsed: would a RP have cooled down in that time, look to see if enough time had passed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

provocation

A

Can mere words by spoken and be okay for provocation: NO b/c they won’t qualify as a categorical rule

Apply RP standard for adequate provocation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

rekindling

A

cool down- look to see what time has passed ( you can be rekindled from emotion after the time has passed - the defense of provocation will be allowed if cool down time hasn’t happened:

Killing a 3rd party: D became furious and attacks person - bystander tries to jump in and kills them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Unintentional Killing: Involuntary Manslaughter
Criminal homicide constitutes manslaughter when: committed recklessly (conscious disregard, substantial risk & unjustifiable)( person should know about the risk but that doesn’t mean that they actually knew- need evidence on what they were thinking) (have to realize that it was dangerous to be reckless) Risk taking is justified when the enjoyment outweighs the cost of that risk Conscious disregard: look at person’s experience ect
26
MPC: says involuntary manslaughter is
a reckless killing. MPC juris call negligent killing as negligent homicide. CL says IV it is negligent killing (make sure you apply both)( look at PP slide visual for this) Reckless killing can still be involuntary manslaughter
27
murder w depraved heart
killing & gross recklessness : gross recklessness- hardness of heart, cruelty, mind regardless of duty: callous disregard : extreme recklessness look at percentage of killing in Malone case was 60% (substantial % of risk) Other EX: dropping a brick in a crow, failing to secure a vicious dog, shooting or driving into a crowd
28
negligent homicide
Person acts negligently and is a material element of an offense when he should be aware of substantial and unjustifiable risk to that material element would result from his conduct
29
Murder w intent to inflict serious bodily harm
Unintentional killer (killing) Had intent to injury but killed unintentionally (inflict serious bodily harm) (IRAC) If they knew the other person would be seriously harmed by the end of the action then they had the intent to inflict serious bodily harm ( grave harm not trivial harm- harm that creates substantial risk of death or permanent disfigurement or impairment Look at crimes with accidental killing (see if it is in fact accidental)
30
felony murder
P must commit or attempt to commit a felony (in the course refers to attempting, committing, or in flight after a felony) ( flight after is when D reaches a point of temporary safety) Look to see when the def caused the death In the course of this act they kill someone
31
Voluntary Act req: ACT elements (conduct & result)
Omissions: Causations: (discovering you did the act but you were just a puppet: won’t actually convict person of the crime - People v. Newton)
32
felony murder - strict liable
Kill In the course of a felony (must be an inherently dangerous felony) “In the course of a felony”: while attempting, committing, or in flight after a felony. No mental state element. Meaning does not look at recklessness, intent, etc. “Flight after”: Until D reaches a point of temporary safety
33
limitations; inherently dangerous felony
A person cannot be convicted of felony murder unless their predicate felony was “inherently dangerous”.
34
approach to danger felony
Abstract Approach: Looks only at the elements of the crime, not the facts of the case or D’s actions. Does person fulfill elements of crime? Will they necessarily present a substantial threat to human life? - If there is any way a person could commit this crime without presenting a threat to human life, then it is not inherently dangerous. As-Committed Approach: Looks at the actions of D. Did D’s actions necessarily present a substantial threat to human life?
35
Merger Rule (independent felony requirement): Stops other homicides from becoming felony murder.
When the felony “merges” with the killing, the felony cannot be the predicate felony for felony murder, and D therefore cannot be convicted of felony murder.
36
merger felonies
Homicides - The most dangerous felonies Manslaughter Battery Assaultive felonies: Involves a threat of immediate violent injury
37
Misdemeanor Manslaughter
Killing In the course of an unlawful act Misdemeanor Felony not serious enough for felony murder
38
limitations
Type of crime Some jurisdiction: any misdemeanor is sufficient Other jurisdiction: predicate must be “malum in se” (bad in and of itself) Causal Connection The misdemeanor must cause the death
39
Murder w intent to inflict serious bodily harm
Unintentional killer (killing) Had intent to injury but killed unintentionally (inflict serious bodily harm) (IRAC) If they knew the other person would be seriously harmed by the end of the action then they had the intent to inflict serious bodily harm ( grave harm not trivial harm- harm that creates substantial risk of death or permanent disfigurement or impairment Look at crimes with accidental killing (see if it is in fact accidental)
40
Felony Murder
P must commit or attempt to commit a felony (in the course refers to attempting, committing, or in flight after a felony) ( flight after is when D reaches a point of temporary safety) Look to see when the def caused the death In the course of this act they kill someone Deals with egg shell P doctrine doesn’t matter how the victim was at the time of the incident Murder: to the 1st degree which then leads to life in prison EX: When a dad kills his son Doesn’t have to show any bad mental state about crime
41
Special issues w Elements of Crimes ( when its not clear what to do w/ act element)
Voluntary Act req: ACT elements (conduct & result) Omissions: caused another person’s death by failing to help someone when they needed help- see if this will count as the act of a crime Causations: (discovering you did the act but you were just a puppet: won’t actually convict person of the crime - People v. Newton) Considered unconsciousness defense in case of Newton: to act on autopilot but not aware of what you are doing : completely unaware (look at circumstances of event & after) - you aren’t acting voluntarily bc they aren’t exerting their will on the act
42
involuntary act: can't satisfy act element of crime
Physical coercion Unconscious Seizures & reflexes Hypnosis (also voluntary) Sleepwalking
43
voluntary act
If you're-threatened or ordered to do it Hypnosis (also involuntary)
44
voluntary & involuntary act
Willful blindness Strict liability
45
omissions: reasonability to protect
Failure to act (can we punish ppl for failing to act) Look at legal duty to act: then a failure to act; will then count as an act Look at the person’s actions and if they contributed a significant risk Look to see if actions were justified: look to the law — split on this
46
Rationales for felony murder
Utilitarian: it is morally right to act or adopt a rule when the expected benefits outweigh the expected costs This rule will deter people from committing felonies This rule will encourage felons to be careful Retributive: a person who kills in the course of a felony deserves the punishment for murder.
47
inherently dangerous felony
a person cannot be convicted of felony murder unless their predicate felony was “inherently dangerous
48
approaches for inherently dangerous felony
as committed: look @ actions of def & did it necessarily present a substantial threat to human life
49
misdemeanor manslaughter: malum in se
bad in itself or bad because prohibited
50
MM: limitations on casual connection
reasonable foreseeability that unlawful act would cause death
51
felony fraud
A person is guilty of felony murder if he kills in the course of a felony. The felony must be (1) inherently dangerous, and (2) independent (meaning it does not merge).
52
indep. Felony
Merger Rule: when the felony merges with the killing, the felony can’t be the predicate felony fpr felony murder and D therefore can’t be convicted of felony murder Felonies merge if they are assaultive- involves a threat of immediate violent injury Voluntary manslaughter & battery are merger assaultives: no felony murder Robbery & rape: don’t merge and isn’t assaultive: felony murder
53
voluntary act req.
ACT elements (conduct & result) Omissions: caused another person’s death by failing to help someone when they needed help- see if this will count as the act of a crime
54
causation of voluntary
(discovering you did the act but you were just a puppet: won’t actually convict person of the crime - People v. Newton) Considered unconsciousness defense in case of Newton: to act on autopilot but not aware of what you are doing : completely unaware (look at circumstances of event & after) - you aren’t acting voluntarily bc they aren’t exerting their will on the act
55
involuntary
Physical coercion Unconscious Seizures & reflexes Hypnosis (also voluntary) Sleepwalking
56
voluntary
If you're-threatened or ordered to do it Hypnosis (also involuntary)
57
omission
Failure to act (can we punish ppl for failing to act) Look at legal duty to act: then a failure to act; will then count as an act Look at the person’s actions and if they contributed a significant risk Look to see if actions were justified: look to the law — split on this
58
duty to act
Status relationship: like a family member Contractual relationship: elderly person in assisted living: duty to then care for & protect that person : make sure payment is involved when looking at this duty: dropping kids off doesn’t then assume a contractual obligation Statutory duty: teachers have duty to report to auth for child abuse Voluntary assumption of care & seclusion: taking injured person into your house you then assumed care and have secluded them
59
causation
Look @ actual or proximate cause: yes to both then the element is satisfied Intervening causes: superseding cases - if its not extraordinary then the person is a proximate cause of that result: bc if it was then it is not reasonably foreseeable Can you reasonably foresee something that has never happened before
60
intervening cause
Cause that comes between D’s act and the ultimate result Was it superseding: it breaks the chain of causation If intervening cause was foreseeable then it doesn’t break the chain of causation
61
4 factors for intervening but possibly not supersede
foreseeable, IC responsive to D’s act, how substantial is D’s contribution was trivial to the result, did D intend the result
62
intervening human acts
Human act between D’s act and the result Look to see if another person had to come in Look to see if the def caused (act) the death, then mental state Then, after that evaluate the result
63
mistaken (accidently caused the result): 4 factors
oreseeable, IC responsive to D’s act, how substantial is D’s contribution was trivial to the result, did D intend the result
64
intentional: caused the result
General rule: such acts are superseding ( doesn’t always apply) Irresponsible factors: when under the dominion and control of another : look also to impairments, physically & psychologically: exception is the 4 factors Intervening human actor can intentionally cause a result: it will be a superseding cause and will let defendant off the hook

Law school subjects (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions