Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law - B > Criminal Law > Flashcards

Criminal Law Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

Actus Reus

A

Guilty act; An act, omission or state of affairs that is prohibited

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

Mens Rea

A

Guilty mind; the mental or fault element of a crime

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

Conduct crimes

A

Offences where act itself is prohibited EG. DUI

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

Consequence crimes

A

Must have a consequence alongside original action in order for a crime to have been committed

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

State of affairs

A

An act of being Eg R v Larsonner (1993)

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

6 omissions

A

Statutory Duty (Airedale Trust v Bland), Contractual Duty (R v Pitwood), Relationship (R v Gibbins & Procter), Voluntary Duty (R v Stone & Dobbinson), Official Position (R v Dytham) and D caused events.

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

Factual cause

A

D can only be guilty if the consequence wouldn’t have happened ‘But for’ D’s conduct (R v Pagett)

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

Legal cause

A

D’s conduct need not be the substantial cause (R v Kimsey)

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

Thin-skull rule

A

D must take V as they find them despite any illness that could have enhanced injuries (R v Blaue)

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

Intervening acts

A

Must be directly linked to D’s conduct, sometimes something else happens after D’s conduct that furthers the act (R v Smith and R v Cheshire)

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

Medical treatment

A

Sufficiently independent acts will break chain of causation (R v Jordan)

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

Victims own acts

A

D causes V to react in a foreseeable way then any injury to V will be considered to have been caused by D (R v Malcherek and R v Kennedy)

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

No MR fault in these circumstances

A

Children under 10, involuntary acts, lack of required MR and legally recognised defence

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

Direct intent

A

When someone has the intention to use unlawful force on another

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

Foresight of consequences

A

When D’s main aim was not prohibited consequence but in achieving the aim they realised or foresaw that they would cause those consequences

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

Subjective recklessness

A

The Defendant knows there is a risk of the consequences happening but acts regardless (R v Cunningham)

17
Q

Negligence

A

D may be found guilty if they did not act as a reasonable men would’ve in those circumstances (R v Adomako)

18
Q

Strict liability offences

A

Where no MR is required for at least one part of AR (Callow v Tillstone etc.)

19
Q

Transferred Malice

A

Where D intends to commit an offence against one person but it affects a different V (R v Latimer)

20
Q

Continuing act

A

Where AR takes place without an initial MR but then during the act the MR is informed, an offence has taken place (DPP v Fagan)

21
Q

Assault definition

A

An which causes the Victim to apprehend the infliction of immediate unlawful force with either intention to cause another to fear immediate unlawful force personal violence or recklessness as to whether such fear is caused in S.39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988

22
Q

Mens rea of assault

A
  • An intention to cause another to fear immediate unlawful violence, or
  • Subjective recklessness as to whether such fear is caused
    Assault classed as an offence of basic intent
23
Q

Assault recklessness

A
  1. Intend to cause V to fear force (Apprehend unlawful force)
  2. Subjectivity recklessness - knowing risk and proceeding regardless
  3. Knowing risk of V being scared and doing it anyway
24
Q

Battery definition

A

The application of unlawful force to another person either intending to apply unlawful force or being reckless as to whether such force is applied under S.38 of The Criminal Justice Act 1988

25
Q

Mens rea of Battery

A
  • An intention to apply unlawful physical force to another, or
  • Subjective recklessness as to whether unlawful force is applied
26
Q

ABH definition

A

In R v Miller (1954) defined as actual bodily harm includes any injury or hurt calculated to interfere with the health of comfort of the victim under S.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

27
Q

Mens rea of ABH

A
  • Intention to cause fear of unlawful violence or apply unlawful force, or
  • Be reckless in causing fear of unlawful violence or applying unlawful force
28
Q

GBH S.20

A

S. 20: Malicious wounding/inflicting grievous bodily harm
Mens rea: Intent to inflict some harm, or recklessness
Under S.20 Offences against the person act 1861

29
Q

GBH S.18

A

S. 18: Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm with intent
Mens rea: Intent to cause GBH
Under S.18 Offences against the person act 1861

30
Q

Murder definition

A

Lord coke: The unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being, under the Queen’s peace, with malice aforethought, expressed or implied

Law - B (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions