Criminal Law

Question 1

MED

*ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF A CRIME

Answer 1

Almost all crimes require proof of the following four core elements:

1. Actus Reus (Physical Act). The defendant must have either performed a voluntary physical act or failed to act under circumstances imposing a legal duty to act.
   
   1. (A failure to act gives rise to liability only if: (a) There is a legal duty to act (e.g., by statute, contract, relationship, etc.);(b) The defendant has knowledge of the facts giving rise to the duty to act;AND(c) It is reasonably possible to perform the duty.)
2. Mens Rea (Mental State). The defendant must have committed the offense with a culpable state of mind. However, a defendant need not know that their conduct is illegal to be guilty of a crime.
3. Causation. There must be a casual connection between the defendant’s physical act or failure to act and the harmful result.
4. Concurrence. The requisite mental state must be present at the same time the physical act constituting the crime occurs.

Question 2

MED

*Actus Reus

DEFINE

Answer 2

Actus Reus (Physical Act). The defendant must have either performed a voluntary physical act or failed to act under circumstances imposing a legal duty to act.

Question 3

MED

*Actus Reus

Failure to Act

Answer 3

A failure to act gives rise to liability only if:

1. There is a legal duty to act (e.g., by statute, contract, relationship, etc.);
2. WITH knowledge of facts that give rise to the duty to act; AND
3. AND it is reasonably possible to perform the duty.

Question 4

MED

*Mens Rea

Define

Answer 4

Mens Rea (Mental State). The defendant must have committed the offense with a culpable state of mind.

However, a defendant need not know that their conduct is illegal to be guilty of a crime.

Question 5

MED

*Causation

Define Criminal Element

Answer 5

Causation. There must be a casual connection between the defendant’s physical act or failure to act and the harmful result.

ACTUAL AND PROXIMATE CAUSE of the harmful result

Question 6

MED

*Concurrance

Define Criminal Element

Answer 6

Concurrence. The requisite mental state must be present at the same time the physical act constituting the crime occurs.

MENTAL STATE and PHYSCIAL ACT must be present at the same time

Question 7

HIGH

**SPECIFIC INTENT

Answer 7

Specific intent requires that the crime be committed with a specific intent or objective.

The existence of specific intent cannot be conclusively imputed from the mere doing of an act, but the manner in which the crime was committed may provide evidence of specific intent.

Question 8

HIGH

**SPECIFIC INTENT CRIMES

LIST 10

Answer 8

Specific intent crimes include:

(a) Solicitation (intent to have the person solicited commit the crime)
(b) Attempt (intent to complete the crime)
(c) Conspiracy (intent to have the crime completed)
(d) First Degree Murder (premeditated intent to kill)
(e) Assault (intent to commit a battery)
(f) Larceny and Robbery (intent to permanently deprive another of his interest in the property taken)
(g) Burglary (intent to commit a felony in the dwelling)
(h) Forgery (intent to defraud)
(i) False Pretenses (intent to defraud)
(j) Embezzlement (intent to defraud)

Question 9

HIGH

**INTENT NECESSARY FOR MALICE CRIMES

Answer 9

The intent necessary for malice crimes require a

reckless disregard of an obvious or high risk that the particular harmful result will occur.

Malice crimes include common law murder and arson.

Question 10

HIGH

**GENERAL INTENT

also list (5) examples

Answer 10

Defendant intended to to commit the act that is prohibited by law.

_______________

General intent is a “catch-all” category of intent.

It requires that the defendant intend to commit an act that is prohibited by law (whether the defendant intended the act’s result is irrelevant).

General intent crimes include:

1. battery,
2. rape,
3. manslaughter,
4. kidnapping, and
5. false imprisonment.

Question 11

HIGH

**MENTAL STATE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE MODEL PENAL CODE

4 categories of intent

Answer 11

The model penal code adopts the following four categories of intent:

1. Purposely. A defendant acts “purposely” when his conscious objective is to engage in the conduct or to cause a certain result.
2. Knowingly or Willfully. A defendant acts “knowingly or willingly” when the defendant is aware that his conduct is of the nature required by the crime or that circumstances required by the crime exist.
3. Recklessly. A defendant acts “recklessly” when the defendant acts with a conscious disregard of substantial and unjustifiable risk that a material element of a crime exists or will result from his conduct.
4. Negligently. A defendant acts “negligently” when the defendant fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a material element of a crime exists or will result from his conduct.

Question 12

MED

*COMMON LAW MURDER

Include states of mind

Answer 12

Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.

Malice aforethought exists if there are NO facts reducing the killing to voluntary manslaughter or excusing it AND

it was committed with one of the following states of mind:

1. Intent to kill;
2. Intent to inflict great bodily injury;
3. Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (“depraved heart murder”); OR
4. Intent to commit a felony (felony murder rule).

Question 13

MED

*VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER

Answer 13

Voluntary manslaughter is a killing that would be murder BUT FOR the existence of adequate provocation. Provocation is adequate only if:

1. It was a provocation that would arouse sudden and intense passion in the mind of an ordinary person, causing him to lose self-control; AND
2. There was not sufficient time between the provocation and the killing for passions of a reasonable person to cool off.

Question 14

MED

*INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER

Answer 14

Involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional killing committed:

1. With criminal negligence; OR
2. During an unlawful act (In the commission of a misdemeanor or in the commission of a felony that is not statutorily treated as 1st or 2nd degree murder.

Question 15

MED

*FIRST AND SECOND DEGREE MURDER

1st degree murder circumstances (3)

Answer 15

In some jurisdictions, murder is divided into degrees by statute. Generally, a murder is 2nd degree murder unless it falls under any of the following statutory aggravating circumstances, which make it 1st degree:

1. Premeditation. The murder was deliberate and premeditated. If the defendant made the decision to kill in a cool and dispassionate manner and actually reflected on the idea of killing, even if only for a very brief period, it is 1st degree murder.
2. Felony Murder. The murder falls under a 1^st degree felony murder statute. In many states, a killing committed during the commission of an enumerated felony is felony murder and called 1st degree murder. The most commonly listed felonies in such statutes are burglary, arson, rape, robbery, and kidnapping (BARRK); however, other felonies that are inherently dangerous to human life are often included.
3. Heinous Murder. Some states make killings that are performed in a certain way (e.g., torture, mutilation, etc.) 1st degree murder.

Question 16

MED

*FELONY MURDER RULE

Define + 4 limits

Answer 16

Death is caused during the commission (or attempted commission) of a felony. Subject to the following:

1. Must have have committed the felony
2. Felony must be distinct from the killing
3. Death must be foreseeable result
4. Death must have been cause before immediate flight after felony ended

_________________

Any death caused in the commission of, or in an attempt to commit, a felony is murder. However, there are several limitations to this rule:

1. The defendant must have committed or attempted to commit the underlying felony - a defense that negates an element of an underlying offense will also be a defense to felony murder;
2. The felony must be distinct from the killing itself;
3. The death must have been a foreseeable result of the felony; AND
4. The death must have been caused before the defendant’s “immediate flight” from when the felony ended.

Question 17

MED

*HOMICIDE CAUSATION

Answer 17

ACTUAL AND PROXIMATE cause of victims death:

1. BUT FOR CAUSE
2. NATURAL AND PROBABLY CONSEQUENCE of defendant’s conduct

_______________

To be liable for homicide, the defendant’s conduct must be both the cause-in-fact and the proximate cause of the victim’s death:

1. A defendant’s conduct is the cause-in-fact of the victim’s death if the death would not have occurred but for the defendant’s conduct.
2. A defendant’s conduct is the proximate cause of the victim’s death if the death is a natural and probable consequence of defendant’s conduct. Superseding events break the chain of proximate causation [i.e., intervening events that are NOT foreseeable generally shield the defendant).
   
   1. NOTE: A third party’s negligent medical care and the victim’s refusal of medical treatment for religious reasons are both foreseeable risks – thus, the defendant remains liable

Question 18

MED

*LARCENY

Answer 18

(1) taking/carrying away (2) the property of another (3) BY TRESSPASS (without consent) (5) with INTENT to permanently deprive.

__________________________

Larceny consists of:

1. A taking;
2. And carrying away;
3. Of the personal property of another; [The property must be taken from the custody or possession of
   another. If the defendant had possession of the property at the time of the taking, the crime is not larceny (may be embezzlement)]
4. By trespass (without consent);
5. With intent to permanently deprive.

Question 19

MED

*EMBEZZLEMENT

Answer 19

(1) intentional permanent fraudulent conversion of (2) property of another (3) while in lawful possession of that property

_______________________

Embezzlement consists of:

1. The fraudulent conversion; [The defendant MUST intend to defraud (e.g., if the defendant intends to restore the exact property taken, it is NOT embezzlement)]
2. Of the personal property of another;
3. By a person in lawful possession of that property.

Custody of the property is insufficient – the defendant must be in lawful possession of the property when the conversion occurs for it to constitute embezzlement. Possession involves a greater scope of authority to deal with property than does custody (e.g., low level employees usually only have custody of their employer’s property – thus, they commit larceny if they take it)

Question 20

MED

*FALSE PRETENSES

(5)

Answer 20

(1) obtaining TITLE (2) of property of another (3) by INTENTIONAL false representation of (4) material past or present fact (5) with intent to defraud

_____________________

False pretenses consists of:

1. Obtaining TITLE;
2. To the personal property of another;
3. By an intentional false representation; [The victim must rely upon the false representation, and that reliance must cause the victim to pass title to the defendant]
4. Of a material past or present fact (not opinion);
5. With intent to defraud.
   
   1. The defendant must either have known the statement to be false or have intended that the victim rely on the misrepresentation.

Question 21

MED

*LARCENY BY TRICK

Answer 21

Larceny by trick consists of:

1. Obtaining POSSESSION or CUSTODY;
2. To the personal property of another;
3. By an intentional false representation;
4. Of a material past or present fact (not opinion);
5. With intent to defraud.

Question 22

MED

*INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER THE M’NAGHTEN RULE

Answer 22

Under the M’Naghten Rule, a defendant is entitled to acquittal if, because of a mental illness, he did not know:

1. The nature and quality of the unlawful act; OR
2. The wrongfulness of the unlawful act.

Question 23

MED

*INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER THE IRRESISTIBLE IMPULSE TEST

Answer 23

Under the Irresistible Impulse Test, a defendant is entitled to acquittal if, because of a mental illness, he lacked the capacity:

1. For self-control and free choice; OR
2. To conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.

Question 24

MED

*INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER THE MODEL PENAL CODE TEST

Answer 24

Under the Model Penal Code, a defendant is entitled to acquittal if, because of a mental illness, he did not have substantial capacity:

1. To appreciate the wrongfulness of the unlawful act; OR
2. To conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.

Question 25

MED

*INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER THE DURHAM TEST

Answer 25

Under the Durham Test, a defendant is entitled to acquittal if the unlawful act would not have been committed BUT FOR the defendant’s mental illness.