Criminal Law Flashcards
For the Actus Reus element of a criminal offense, what are some types of pre-existing duties that would make an omission (failure to act) an offense?
- Statutory Duties
- Special Relationship (Parent, Spouse, etc.)
- Contract (Lifeguard, Home Care Provider, etc.)
- Detrimental Undertaking (Leaving a victim in a worse position after “treatment”; intervening in a rescue, then abandoning)
- Causation (Failure to aid after causing peril)
What are the Mens Rea categories? (Just list them)
- Specific Intent
- Malice Crimes
- General Intent
What are the Specific Intent crimes?
Specific Offense crimes require the defendant to have a subjective desire, specific objective, or knowledge to accomplish a prohibited result (IE unexcused criminal act + specific intent)
Remember FIAT;
- First-Degree Murder
- Inchoate Crimes (Attempt, Solicitation, Conspiracy)
- Assault with the intent to cause Battery
- Theft-Crimes (Larceny, Larceny-By-Trick, False Pretenses, Embezzlement, Forgery, Burglary, Robbery)
What are the Theft Offenses? (Just list them)
- Larceny
- Larceny-By-Trick
- False Pretenses
- Embezzlement
- Forgery
- Burglary
- Robbery
What are the Malice Crimes?
Malice crimes require a reckless disregard for a high-risk of harm. Unlike Specific Intent crimes, Malice crimes only require the unexcused criminal act; the specific intent element is dropped (the mens rea part is the carelessness).
- Common-Law Murder
- Arson
What are some General Intent crimes?
General intent crimes require the commission of an unexcused criminal act and only the intent to perform an act that is unlawful (IE without regard to the specific outcome or harm the act will cause).
Examples include:
- Battery, Rape, Kidnapping, False Imprisonment
Distinguish Motive from Intent.
Motive is the justification or reason the act was committed; intent is the desire or goal of accomplishing some act or harm.
List the Mens Rea tiers under the Model Penal Code (MPC)
- Purposefully - Defendant’s conscious objective is to engage in the conduct or to cause a certain result.
- Knowingly / Willfully - Defendant is aware that his conduct is of the nature required by the crime, or that the circumstances required by the crime exist; IE Defendant knows the result is practically certain to occur based on his conduct.
- Recklessly - Defendant acts with a conscious disregard of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a material element of a crime exists or will occur based on conduct. A gross deviation from the standard conduct of a law-abiding person.
- Negligently - Defendant “should be aware” of a substantial and unjustifiable risk.
What is the Mens Rea in an MPC question where the requisite mental state goes unstated?
Recklessness; Also if a mens rea state is provided for one element, it presumptively applies to all of them unless a contrary purpose plainly applies.
What are some Strict Liability crimes?
- Statutory Rape
- Bigamy
- Regulatory Offenses for Public Welfare
- Regulation of Food, Drugs, and Firearms
- Selling Liquor to Minors
What is the modern trend for vicarious strict liability cases?
Strict liability only applies vicariously to regulatory crimes. Generally, the more serious the punishment, the less likely vicarious liability is to apply in a strict liability case.
Imprisonment likely runs afoul of due process requirements; fines probably do not.
How does vicarious liability affect corporations at common law, under the modern trend, and under the M.P.C.?
Traditionally at common law, corporations could not be held vicariously liable. Modern statutes apply liability where actor is an agent of the corporation acting within the cope of employment, or where the actor is a high ranking corporate agent whose actions represent corporate policy.
MPC
Liability attaches where:
- BOD or High-Ranking Official authorizes or tolerates the reckless act (while acting in the scope of employment)
- Statutory imposed liability upon the corporation;
- Corporation fails to discharge a statutory duty.
When is a Mistake of Fact a valid defense for Specific Intent crimes, Malice Intent crimes, General intent Crimes, and under the Model Penal Code. (Reasonableness)
Specific Intent - a Mistake of fact is a valid defense to a specific intent crime, regardless of whether it is reasonable or unreasonable.
General Intent and Malice Crimes - A mistake of fact is only a valid defense if the mistake was unreasonable.
M.P.C. - “A mistake or ignorance of fact that negates the required state of mind for a material element of a crime is a defense.” (Not precisely sure what this means).
Although Mistake of Law is generally inapplicable as a defense (“ignorance is no excuse”), what are the three exceptions where a mistake of law is a valid defense?
- Reliance on the decision of a court, administrative order, or official interpretation of the law determined to be erroneous after the conduct.
- A statute defining a malum prohibitum crime was not reasonably made available prior to the conduct.
- Per the MPC, when an honestly held mistake of law negates the required intent (e.g. specific intent) or mental state (e.g. “purposefully”).
A state may prosecute a person for a crime fully committed within the state, or partially committed therein where one of the elements was committed there. What are the three other circumstances under which a state may prosecute someone?
- Conduct outside the state constituting an attempt to commit a crime within the state.
- Conspiracy to commit an offense within a state when an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy occurs within the state.
- Conduct occurring within the state, constituting attempt, solicitation, or conspiracy of a crime in another jurisdiction when both the state and the other jurisdiction recognize the crime.
- The failure to perform outside the state a duty imposed within the state.
What are the types of accessories?
Principal in the First Degree - a/k/a the Principal; primary person committing the actus reus.
Principal in the Second Degree - An accomplice who was actually or constructively present at the scene of the crime.
Accessory Before / After the Fact - An accomplice not present at the scene of the crime, depending on when assistance was provided.
How can an accomplice withdraw from a crime (Note: crimes OTHER THAN Inchoate Crimes)
The accomplice must:
- Repudiate prior aid;
- Do all that is possible to countermand the prior assistance;
- Do so before the chain of events is in motion and unstoppable.
Note; A change of heart, flight from a crime scene, arrest, or uncommunicated intent to withdraw is insufficient.
What are the elements of Misprison? And What is it?
Misprison is a common law misdemeanor for failing to report or concealing a felon. The person must
- have had full knowledge that the principal committed the alleged felony;
- failed to notify the authorities; and
- taken an affirmative step to conceal the crime.
List and describe the four insanity tests.
- N’Naghten Test - Defendant is not guilty if, due to a mental defect or disease, he did not know either (1) the nature and quality of the act; or (2) the wrongfulness of the act. In essence; did the mental defect destroy the requisite mens rea?
- Irresistible Impulse Test - Defendant is not guilty if he lacked the capacity for self control and free choice because a mental disease or defect prevented him from being able to conform his conduct to the law. Doesn’t have to be a sudden loss of control. Impulse must be irresistable.
- Durham Rule - But for test (most lenient, least used) - Defendant’s conduct would not have occurred but for some mental disease or defect.
- MPC Test; Combines 1 and 2.
For what crimes is voluntary intoxication a valid defense? (Common law, MPC)
Even so, when is it inapplicable as a defense?
Specific Intent crimes. Under the MPC, Purposefully and Knowingly (Where the intoxication prevents to formation of the requisite mental state).
(b) When the Defendant formed the requisite intent and subsequently became intoxicated for the purposes of establishing a defense.
When is Involuntary Intoxication a valid defense? (For what crimes)?
For almost anything.
What are the common law rules concerning the defense of Immaturity and Infancy? Modern Trend?
< age 7; cannot be convicted of a crime.
Age 7-13; Rebuttably assumed to be incapable of committing a crime.
Age 14+; Could be charged with a crime as an adult.
Modern Trend: Generally, no child can be convicted of a crime until a certain age is reached; usually an age between 11 and 14, depending on the jurisdiction.
