Crime Elements

Question 1

actus reus generally

Answer 1

the act required to commit a given crime
- a required component of every CL crime (along w/ mens rea)

Question 2

actus reus definition

Answer 2

voluntary physical act or failure to act

EXCEPTION: self-induced state (eg, epileptic driving knowingly)

Question 3

act

Answer 3

any bodily movement

Question 4

omission as actus reus

Answer 4

a failure to act can constitute actus reus if:
1. D had a specific legal duty to act,
2. D had knowledge of facts giving rise to duty, and
3. it was reasonably possible for D to perform the duty

Question 5

legal duty to act

Answer 5

• by statute
• by contract (eg employment k like lifeguard)
• relationship between parties (eg parent)
• voluntary assumption of care (eg failure to finish performance)
• D created peril

Question 6

mens rea generally

Answer 6

the mental element required at time a crime committed
- required element of CL crimes (along w/ actus reus)

default CL

Question 7

mens rea definition

Answer 7

culpable state of mind
aka “mental state”

Question 8

forms of mens rea

Answer 8

intent requirements differ by crime:
1. specific intent
2. general intent
3. malice

Question 9

specific intent

Answer 9

D must have a specific intent or objective to commit the given crime
- Specific intent must alwasy be proven NEVER inferred
- BUT, manner may provide circumstantial evidence of intent

Special defenses: unreasonable mistake of fact + voluntary intoxication

intent to commit the actus reus + more

Question 10

general intent

Answer 10

D must be aware of his actions and any attendant circumstances
* may be inferred by act itself

NOTE: most crimes are general intent crimes

intent to commit actus reus only

Question 11

malice

Answer 11

D acts w/ reckless disregard or understakes an obvious risk, from which a harmful result is expected
- aka depraved heart
- applies to arson and common law murder

Question 12

no mens rea requirement for

Answer 12

• strict liability
• vicarious liability

Question 13

strict liability

Answer 13

no intent or awareness required for strict liability crimes
* any defense that negates intent does NOT matter
* Consent is NO defense

Question 14

strict liability examples

Answer 14

• statuory rape
• regulatory crimes
• morality crimes

Question 15

vicarious liability

Answer 15

person w/out fault is held liable for another’s criminal conduct
- like respondeat superior

NOTE: often arises w/ employment or business associations

eg, employer liable for employee’s crimes

Question 16

MPC mens rea standards

Answer 16

• purposely
• knowingly
• recklessly
• negligently (objective standard)

assume CL first unless Q says MPC

Question 17

purposely

Answer 17

a person acts purposely when his conscious objective is to engage in certain conduct or cause a certain result

Question 18

knowingly

Answer 18

a person acts knowingly when he is aware that his conduct is of a particular nature or knows that his conduct will necessarily or very likely cause a particular result

Question 19

recklessly

Answer 19

consciously disregard of substantial and unjustifiable risk

gross deviation from standard of care

Question 20

negligence

Answer 20

(objective standard) fails to beomce aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk

Question 21

general intent crimes

Answer 21

• battery
• rape
• kidnapping
• false imprisonment

Question 22

specific intent crimes

Answer 22

• solicitation
• conspiracy
• attempt
• first-degree murder
• assault
• larceny
• embezzlement
• forgery
• robbery
• burglary
• false pretenses

voluntary intoxication + unreasonable mistake of fact are defenses

students can always fake a laugh, even for ridiculous bar facts

Question 23

malice crimes

Answer 23

• 2nd degree murder (CL murder)
• arson

Question 24

strict liability crimes

Answer 24

• statutory rape
• regulatory crimes
• administrative crimes
• morality crimes (eg bigamy, polygamy, underage drinking accessory)

Question 25

concurrence requirement

Answer 25

D’s criminal act and the requisite intent (ie mens rea) for the crime must occur simultaneously
- intent must prompt the act

eg D plans on murdering V at her home. D is not guilty of murder if he accidentally runs over V w/ his car before reaching her house

Question 26

causation requirement

Answer 26

D’s conduct must be both the cause-in-fact and the promixate cause of the crime committed

ET: causation issues often arise in homicide crimes

Question 27

cause-in-fact

Answer 27

but for D’s conduct, the result would not have occurred
- or substantial factor

Homicide and manslaughter: any act by D that hastens V’s death is a cause-in-fact, even if death is inevitable
- shortens V’s life

Question 28

promixate cause

Answer 28

the actual result is the natural and probable consequence of D’s conduct
- even if it did not occur exactly as expected

watch out for superseding factors + intervening acts

Question 29

superseding factors

Answer 29

breaks the chain of causation

Question 30

intervening acts

Answer 30

must be entirely unforseeable to shield D from liability

Dependent intervening act: must be abnormal too

NOTE: V’s refusal of medical treatment + 3P medical negligence are foreseeable and D is liable

Question 31

transferred intent doctrine

Answer 31

D may be held liable if he intends harm caused, but causes it to a different victim or object than intended
- Often applies to homicide (esp. 1st degree murder), battery, and arson NOT attempt
- defenses and mitigating circumstances may also be transferred

Question 32

transferred intent doctrine effect

Answer 32

D is usually charged w/ two crimes:
1. attempt (to commit OG intended crime), and
2. the actual resulting crime

eg, D intends to shoot A, but kills B; D can be charged w/ attempted murder of A and the actual murder of B
NOTE: merger does NOT apply b/c there are different Vs