Crim rule statements Flashcards
Burden of proving insanity
In a majority of jurisdictions, the defendant has the burden of proving insanity
What kinds of things constitute insanity
Insanity includes mental abnormalities that may affect legal responsibility
Depraved heart murder
In most states, a killing that results from reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life is a depraved heart murder
Involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional homicide that is either committed with criminal negligence or committed while the defendant is engaged in an unlawful act
Criminal negligence
Criminal negligence is a grossly negligent action that puts another person at significant risk of serious bodily injury or death.
Reckless driving and depraved heart murder
Reckless driving alone is usually insufficient to support a finding of depravity absent some aggravating factor such as intoxication
Duress
A defendant can claim duress as a defense when a third party’s unlawful threat causes the defendant to reasonably believe that the only way to avoid death or serious bodily injury to himself or another is to violate the law, and the defendant violates the law
CL burglary
Common law burglary is the breaking and entering of the dwelling of another at nighttime with the specific intent to commit a felony therein
Breaking
for purposes of burglary
Breaking is generally accomplished by using force to create an opening into a dwelling, but slight force, such as pushing open a window that was ajar, satisfies this element
Entering
for purposes of burglary
Entering occurs when any portion of the defendant’s body crosses into the dwelling without permission through the opening created by the breaking
Larceny
Larceny is the trespassory taking and carrying away of the personal property of another with specific intent to deprive the owner of the property
Continuing trespass rule
When an initial taking was trespassory but there was no intent at the time to permanently deprive the person of the property, then the continuing trespass rule serves to deem the original trespass continuing so that it coincides with later acquired criminal intent
Embezzlement
Embezzlement is the fraudulent conversion of the property of another by a person who is in lawful possession of the property
Conversion
For embezzlement purposes
Conversion is the inappropriate use of property, held pursuant to a trust agreement, which causes a serious interference with the owner’s rights to the property
Receiving stolen property
To be guilty of receiving stolen property, the defendant must receive control of stolen property, know that the property is stolen, and intend to permanently deprive the owner of the property.
Stolen property
Property that is unlawfully obtained through larceny, embezzlement, or false pretenses is stolen property
Receiving stolen property and knowledge thereof
The act of receiving the property must coincide with the recipient’s knowledge that the property is stolen
JDX split on knowledge of whether property is stolen
with regard to receipt of stolen property
Some jurisdictions require that the defendant have actual, subjective knowledge that the property has been stolen. Other jurisdictions permit the defendant’s knowledge to be inferred from facts that would alert a reasonable person to unlawful acquisition of the property
Self defense
when not first aggressor
At common law, one who is not the aggressor is justified in using reasonable force against another person to prevent imminent unlawful harm to themself.
The harm to the defendant must be imminent, not a threat of future harm, and the person can only use as much force as is required to repel the attack
Larceny by false pretenses
AKA false pretenses
Larceny by false pretenses requires
1. obtaining title to property
2. of another person
3. through the reliance of that person
4. on a known false representation of a material past or present fact
5. the misrepresentation is made with the intent to defraud
What is NOT a false representation
A statement of opinion such as sales talk or puffery is not a false representation
Acting knowingly
for false pretenses
Most courts find that a D acts knowingly and has knowledge of a particular fact when the D is aware of a high probability of the fact’s existence and deliberately avoids learning the truth
Intent to defraud based on false pretenses
A defendant has the intent to defraud required to establish false pretenses when the D intends that the person to whom the false representation is made will rely on it
4 kinds of malice aforethought
Malice aforethought includes the following mental states: intent to kill, intent to inflict serious bodily harm, reckless indifference to a known and unjustifiably high risk to human life, or the intent to commit certain felonies.
Premeditation definition
Premeditation means the defendant reflected on the idea of killing, even briefly, or planned the killing prior to carrying it out
Causation and murder
In order to be found guilty of murder, the prosecution must prove that the defendant caused the victim’s death. The prosecution must prove both actual and proximate causation.
Actual cause of death
If a victim would not have died but for the defendant’s act, then the defendant’s act is the actual cause of the killing. Furthermore, when a defendant sets in motion forces that lead to the death of the victim, the defendant is the actual cause of the victim’s death.
Proximate cause
Proximate cause exists when the defendant is legally responsible for the death. To be legally responsible, the victim’s death must be foreseeable. That is, the natural and probable result of the defendant’s conduct.
Intervening causes and proximate cause
An intervening cause will not relieve the defendant of criminal responsibility unless it was so out of the ordinary that it would be unjust to hold the defendant responsible.
Is a defendant’s incompetency a bar to trial?
A defendant’s incompetency is a bar to trial.
Constitutional requirement to investigate competence
The judge has a constitutional duty to investigate and determine the competence of the defendant to stand trial if such evidence is apparent to the judge.
Test for whether a defendant is competent to stand trial
The test for whether a defendant is competent to stand trial is the same as whether they are competent to plead guilty: whether the defendant comprehends the nature of the proceedings against him and has the ability to consult with a lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding
M’Naghten test
Under the M’Naghten test, a defendant is not guilty if, because of a defect or mental disease, the defendant did not know either the nature and quality of the act or the wrongfulness of the act
constitutional bases for double jeopardy
The 5th Amendment protection against double jeopardy applies to the states through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, and protects against multiple punishments for the same offense
When does the blockburger test apply
If a defendant’s conduct may be prosecuted as two or more crimes, the blockburger test is applied to determine whether the crimes constitute the same offense for double jeopardy purposes
Blockburger test
Under this test, each crime must require proof of an element the other does not in order for each to be considered a separate offense.
What does the double jeopardy clause bar
The double jeopardy clause generally bars successive prosecutions for greater and lesser included offenses
What is a lesser included offense
A lesser included offense is one that does not require proof of an element beyond those required by the greater offense
Burden of proof on prosecution under DPC
The due process clause requires that the prosecution prove all of the elements of the case beyond a reasonable doubt
mandatory presumptions in criminal cases
A mandatory presumption regarding an element of an offense violates due process requirements. This includes conclusive presumptions that cannot be rebutted, as well as rebuttable mandatory presumptions (which shift the burden of proof re: an element of an offense)
Burden of proof with statutory sentencing enhancements
Any fact, other than a prior conviction, that can be used to increase a sentence beyond the statutorily prescribed maximum must be charged in an indictment, submitted to a jury, and established beyond a reasonable doubt.
A failure to abide by this procedure is a violation of a defendant’s due process rights under the 5th Amendment and 6th Amendment right to notice and a jury trial
