Crim Law Flashcards
Actus Reus
A required component of every common law crime, along
with mens rea
D must perform a voluntary physical act, i.e., a voluntary
bodily movement
Mens Rea
The mental element required at the time a crime was committed
• A required component of every common law crime, along
with actus reus
Specific Intent
D must have a specific intent or objective to commit the given crime
» Specific intent must always be proven; never inferred
» Mistake of fact and voluntary intoxication are available defenses
General Intent
D must be aware of his actions and any attendant circumstances
» May be inferred from the act itself
» Note — most crimes are general intent crimes
Malice Intent
D acts with reckless disregard or undertakes an obvious risk, from which a harmful result is expected
» Applies to arson and common law murder
Actual Causation
But for D’s conduct, the result would not have occurred
» For homicide and manslaughter, any act by D that
hastens victim’s death is a cause-in-fact, even if death
is already inevitable
Proximate Cause
The actual result is the natural and probable consequence of D’s conduct, even if it did not occur exactly as expected
» Superseding factors break the chain of causation
» Intervening acts must be entirely unforeseeable to shield D from liability (e.g., victim’s refusal of medical treatment, third-party medical negligence — both are foreseeable and D is liable)
Specific Intent Crimes
Attempt Larceny & Robbery Forgery False Pretenses Embezzlement Conspiracy Assault Burglary First-degree murder Solicitation
Accomplice
One who aids, encourages, or counsels principals committing a crime, with the intent to encourage its commission
• Mere presence at the crime is not enough; there must be some assistance
Accomplice Liability
Accomplice is liable for the original crime and other
foreseeable crimes committed by the principles in its furtherance
Withdrawal - Accomplice
D can effectively withdraw before the crime is committed or becomes unstoppable
» D must negate or repudiate initial aid or encouragement
Accessory After the Fact
Different than accomplice liability
• Involves helping someone escape or avoid apprehension
• Gives rise to a separate, lesser charge of obstruction of justice
General Intent Crimes
1) Battery
2) Rape
3) Kidnapping
4) False imprisonment
Malice Crimes
1) Common law murder (malice aforethought)
2) Arson
Strict Liability Crimes
1) Statutory rape
2) Regulatory crimes
3) Administrative crimes
4) Morality crimes (e.g., bigamy, polygamy)
Transferred Intent
D may be held liable if he intends the harm caused, but causes it to a different victim or object than intended
• Often applies to homicide, battery, and arson
» Does not apply to attempt
• Defenses and mitigating circumstances may also be
transferred
Effect of Transferred Intent
D is usually charged with two crimes:
1) Attempt (to commit the originally intended crime)
2) The actual resulting crime
• E.g., D intends to shoot A, but kills B; D can be charged with
the attempted murder of A and the actual murder of B
» Note — merger does not apply because there are
different victims
Solicitation
Inciting, urging, or otherwise asking another to commit a crime with the intent that they commit the crime
• No affirmative response from the solicited party is required
Merges with offense.
Defenses to Solicitation
Very few defenses apply to solicitation
• Refusal by the solicitee is not a defense
• Impossibility and withdrawal are not defenses
• MPC allows renunciation as a defense, but common law does not
» Most jurisdictions follow the common law approach
Conspiracy
An agreement between two or more people to commit a crime
Elements of Conspiracy
1) An agreement between two or more people
» I.e., a “meeting of the minds”
» Express agreement is not required
» Parties do not need to know of each other’s existence
2) Intent to enter into the agreement
3) Intent to commit the target crime or pursue the unlawful
objective
4) An overt act in furtherance of the target crime
» Any slight act will suffice under most modern statutes
» Not a required element at common law
Defenses to Conspiracy
Impossibility is not a defense to conspiracy
• Withdrawal is not a defense to conspiracy but may be a defense to liability for co-conspirators’ subsequent crimes
Co-Conspirator Liability
Each conspirator is liable for co-conspirators’ crimes that are:
1) Foreseeable, and
2) Committed in furtherance of the conspiracy
Acquittal of Co-Conspirators
If all alleged co-conspirators are acquitted, no party can be convicted of conspiracy
• However, a person can be convicted of conspiracy even if his co-conspirators have not been found or charged
Withdrawal from Conspiracy
One cannot withdraw from the conspiracy itself
» One can withdraw from co-conspirators’ subsequent
crimes, including the target offense of the conspiracy
• Affirmative act required — withdrawal is effective when the
withdrawing party makes an affirmative act that notifies his
co-conspirators he is withdrawing
• Must be timely — withdrawal must give enough time for coconspirators to abandon plans for the target offense
• The withdrawing party must attempt to neutralize the effect
of any assistance he provided to the original conspiracy
Attempt
An act, done with the intent to commit a crime, that constitutes
an overt or substantial step towards committing the crime but falls short of completing the crime
• I.e., an incomplete act that would be a crime if completed
Overt Act Attempt
D must commit an act beyond mere preparation
• Substantial step — D must take a substantial step towards
committing the target crime
Defenses to Attempt
Legal impossibility
• Legal impossibility is a defense
• Factual impossibility is not a defense
• Abandonment is not a defense — liability for the attempt
arises once D commits an overt act concurrently with the
intent to commit a crime (i.e., D will be liable for attempt of a
given crime before he can abandon the crime)
Merger
Merger concerns the relationship between an inchoate offense and its completed substantive offense
• When merger applies, the inchoate offense (e.g., attempt)
merges into the target offense, prohibiting D from being
prosecuted for both crimes
Only Solicitation and Attempt and FMR
Insanity
Depending on jurisdiction, one of four tests is used to determine whether D was so mentally ill when he committed a crime that he should be entitled to acquittal
• A defense to all crimes, regardless of the intent requirement
Four Insanity Tests
M’Naghten
Irresistible Impulse
MPC
Durham
M’Naghten Test
D doesn’t know right from wrong
» Due to a mental disease or defect, at the time of the
offense D lacked the ability to know the wrongfulness of his conduct or understand the nature and quality of
his act
Irresistible Impulse Test
D acted due an irresistible impulse
» Due to a mental illness, D was unable to control his actions or conform his conduct to the law
MPC Insanity Test
Combination of M’Naghten & Irresistible Impulse
» As a result of D’s mental disease, D lacked the capacity
to either appreciate the criminality of his conduct or
conform his conduct to the requirements of the law
Durham Test
But for his mental illness, D would not have acted
» D’s conduct was the product of a mental illness
Infancy Defense
A defense to criminal liability for minors
• Under 7 years old — no criminal liability
• 7-14 years old — rebuttable presumption against criminal
liability
Diminished Capacity Defense
A defense based on D’s mental defect
• Available if D can show that he has some mental defect
short of insanity that prevented him from forming the mental state required for the crime
• Usually limited to specific intent crimes
Due Process Defense
The Due Process Clause forbids D from being tried, convicted, or sentenced if, as a result of his mental disease or defect, D is unable to either:
a) Understand the nature of the proceeding brought against him, or
b) Assist his lawyer in the preparation of his defense
Voluntary Intoxication
A defense to specific intent crimes • Voluntary intoxication = D chose to consume an intoxicant » Alcoholics and addicts are voluntarily intoxicated • Not available if D becomes intoxicated in order to commit the crime (i.e., “liquid courage”) • Only a defense to specific intent crimes
Involuntary Intoxication
A defense to all crimes
• Arises when D was given an intoxicant without her knowledge or forced to consume an intoxicant