Criminal Law Flashcards
when does a state have jurisdiction in a criminal case
- crimes that occured in state
- crimes that caused a result in stat
- attempt or conspiracy out of state plus and act in state
- attempt or conspiracy in state to commit act outside of state
what is merger and does it exists in criminal law
when conduct results in a misdemeanor and a felony, the misdemeanor offense merges with a felony
the modern rule: NO, except for solicitation
common law: yes
essential acts of a crime
physical act (actus reus) mental state (mens rea) concurrence of the two
what is req for actus reas
voluntary act (act is a bodily movement)
when can omission constitute an act
legal duty to act
possible to perform duty
D. has knowledge of facts giving rise to the duty to act
five situations a duty to act arises
statute relationship contract undertaking of care D created peril
what is specific intent
acting with specific intention or objective
specific intent crimes
solicitation conspircay attempt first degree murder Larceny Assault Embezzlement forgery Robbery Burgulary Fraud
malice
reckless disregard for an obvious or high risk that a harmful result will occur
analysis of mental state classifications
purposefully: conscious object
their is to engage in certain conduct or cause a certain result
knowingly: when they are aware that their conduct
is of a particular nature or that certain circumstances
exist.
recklessly: consciously disregard
a substantial and unjustifiable risk
criminal negligence
transferred intent
The defendant can be liable under the doctrine of transferred
intent when they intend the harm that is actually caused,
but to a different victim or object.
accomplice liability
any principal can be guilty of crime
principal engages in act, accomplice aids, advises, encourages the principal
intent req of an accomplice
intent to assist principal
intent for principal to commit a crime
scope of accomplice liability
any crimes counseled and any crime commited during course of crime that was reasonable and forseeable
can you withdraw from being an accomplice
yes but must
repudiate
neutralise any assitance given (notifying the police sufficient with repudiation)
inchoate crimes
crimes not actually completed
conspiracy
attempt
solicitation
conspiracy
agreement (1) an between two or more people 2. intent to enter into the agreement; (3)intent to achieve the objective an by at least two persons of the agreement.
does intent to enter agreement in conspiracy need to be express
no, can be implied from conduct
can you commit conspircay with a police officer
yes, only one party needs to intent to commit a crime
wharton rule
when more than one person needed to commit a crime, no conspiracy unlessmore parties participate than needed; takes three to conspire
intent req for conspiracy
intent to agree AND intent to commit achieve obj of conspiracy
can mere preparation constittue conspiracy
yes
withdraw from conspiracy
notification to all conspirators
neutralize any rendered assitance
solicitation
inciting someone to commit a crime
with intent of that person to commit a crime (jokes don’t count)
is factual impossibility a defense to solicitation
no
attempt
a specific intent plus act in furtherance of a crime
does mere preparation constitute an attempt
NO, need a substantial step
is abadonment a defense for attempt
common law: no
MPC: yes, but full and voluntary, complete
is factual impossibility a defense for attempt
no
can a criminal be charged with attmept and the complete crime
NO, can be charged with attempt OR the completed crime
common law murder
intent to kill
intent to inflict great bodily harm
felony murder
reckless indifference to an unjustibilble high risk to human life (depraved heart)
statutory murder
first degree: deliberate and premeditated (intent or knowledge), felony muder (enumerated by statute)
second degree: depraved heart and any murder that isn’t first
must a felony be distinct from the murder itself for felony murder
yes
must death be foreseeable result for felony murder
yes
what is the proximate cuase theory from felony murder
resp for victims killed other than co felons
mainstream view
what is the agency theory of felony murder
killing must be committed by felon or co felon (accidental deaths don’t count)
voultary manslaughter
murder WITH adequate provocation (need ALL 4):
- sudden intense passion
- provocation
- D provoked
- D didn’t cool off
imperfect self defense
D starts conflict but honestly (but mistakenly) believes necessity in responding with deadly force
involuntary manslaughter
criminal negligence or recklessness
during commision of criminal act (misdeamnor)
does an act that hastens death consistute causation in criminal killing cases
yes
battery
unlawful application of force resulting in body harm or offensive touching
aggravated battery
deadly weapon
serious harm
child/woman/cop
assault
attempt to bater OR
intentional creation of reasonable apprehension of imminent harm
aggravated assault
deadly weapon
intent to rape murder maim
false imprisonment
unlawful confinement
without consent
kidnapping
unlawful confinement AND
moement of victim OR
concealment of victim
rape
carnal knowledge of another
any penetration works
larceny
taking carrying away of TANGIBLE personal property of another with possession by trespass (without consent) with intent to perm deprive at the time of taking
when must intent to depirve exist in larceny
at the time of taking, must be to take, not borrow
embezzlement
fradulent
conversion (unconsented handling of property)
of anothers property
by a person in lawful possession of that property (key point)
whats the difference bw lacreny and embezzlement
embezzlement req the offender to have lawful possession at the time of conversion
can one replace money as defense to embezzlement
yes, BUT has to be exact money taken. If different money, EVEN IF same amount, thats embezzlement
false pretenses
obtaining titel
to personal property
by inential false statement or past/existing fact
with intent to defraud
must victim actually be decieved in false pretenses
yes
difference bw larceny by trick and false pretenses
tricked into giving possession BUT NOT title
false pretense to acquire title, false pretenses
robbery
taking of personal property from person presence by force or threat of IMMEDIATE injury intent to permanently deprive
extortion
obtaining property by threat to harm (present or future threat)
burgulary
breaking and entry of a dwelling of another (ownership not needed) at night with INTENT to commit a felony in the structure
arson
malicious (intentional or reckless disregard)
burning (some damage needed, not nec fire)
of dwelling (not nec, can be other structure)
of another
insanity tests
mnaughten rule: disease of mind 2. caused a defect of reasoning 3. d lacked ability to know wrongfulness or understand their actions
irresitible impulse: inability to control conduct or conform to law
MPC: lacked capacity to either 1. appreciate criminality OR 2. conform conduct to law
when can voluntary intox be a D
specific intent that req knowledge or purposeful act
involuntary intox
treated as mental illness
d to all crimes
self defense
nondeadly force: whne reasonable belief it is necessary to protect from imminent unlawful force.
deadly force: 1. d is not at fault 2. confronted with unlawful force 3. beleives (sub) they are threatened with imminent death or great harm
defense of other
req reasonble belief that the person assisted has legal right ot use force D is using
defense of property
never deadly force
can defend when reasonable belief of imminent unlawful interference
citizen crime prevention
only if to nec to prevent a felony or serious breach of peace
necessity
commison of crime nec to avoid imminent and greate rinjury to society
mistake
only if D lacked state of mind req for crime
for specific intent: mistake good
for general: mistake plus reasonableness
fourth amendment
unreasonable serach seizure, exclusionary rule
fiftth amendment
self incrimination, double jeopardy
sixth amendment
speedy trial, public trial, trail by jury, confront witnesses, compulsory process for obtianing witnesses, assistance of counsel in felony and misdemeanor when imprisonment
eighth
curel and unusual, excessive fines
seizure
reasonable person would feel not free to decline/leave
arrest
police take custody
probable cause
knowledge sufficient for reasonable person to believe a crime is afoot or committed
does an invalid arrest nullify prosecution
No
reasonable suspicion
more than a vague suspicion or a hunch, less than probable.
duration and scope of terry stop
no time limit, but reasonable time to confirm/dispell suspicison
automobile stop
reasonable suspicion (of any crime or traffic violation, even if purpose of stop is unrelated to justification) all occupants seized can order occupants out and can frisk if reasonable belif they may be armed
standing to challenge a search
must have expectation of privacy
right of possession to place searched OR
palce was home OR
overnight guest
standing for seizure
need to have expectation of privacy for thing taken (none for others stuff, abandonded stuff)
particularity of warrant
must be precise of searched palce and items to be seized
anticipatory warrants?
Yes
warrant search third party place?
yes
can police search occupants detained during a warrant search
No, unless named in warrant
exceptions to warrant req
search incident to arrest (can search auto molbie pass. compartment if D unsecured OR evidence of offense can reasonable be found)
Auto exception: need pc to search whole car and any occupants belongings
plain view
consent
stop and frisk
hot pursuit
evanescent evidence (likely to disappear quickly)
emergnecy aid
uninvited and unreliable ear
if listener consents to monitor, then no warrant needed UNLESS speaker can show attempted to keep convo private
voluntary confession
must be vol thorugh totality of circumstances
has to be official compulsion (private no good)
if harmless error, fine
6th right to counsel
after judicial proccedings begin
to that crime charged (not add. ones)
can’t deliberately elict incriminating statements
can 6th right to counsel be waived
yes, knowing and voluntary
remedy for failure to provide counsel
reversal of conviction
whats req for miranda warning
a custodial
interogation
custody under miranda
reasonable person would feel free to leave
THEN
if environment inherently coercive
are spontaneous statmenet during interrogation by D admissible under miranda
yes
interrogation under miradna
any police behavior likely to elicit an incriminating response
invocation of counsel and silence under miranda
silence: must state unambiguously and explicitly and unequivocal. can question significant time later if remirandize and question unrealted to previously discussed crime
counsel: unambiguous, all questions stop
exclusionary rule
4, 5, 6 violations exceptions: fruits of miranda violation independent source interruptions in chain of misconduct inevitible discovery violating knock and announce
harmless error
conviction as result of illegal evidence overturned on appeal UNLESS govt can show harmless error. if claimed, D can rebut with evidence of substantial and injurous effect of influence on jury verdcit
burden of proof for exclustionary rule
govt, preponderance of the evidence, D entitled to ruling as a matter of law by judge
do witnesses in a grand jury have right to counsel or miranda
no
can grand jury base finding on otherwise inadmissible evidence
yes
must D appear for grand jury if called
yes, but can refuse to answer incrimnating qs
test for speedy trial
totality of the circumstances
what is a serious offense to impose jury trial
confined for over 6 months
min number of jurors
6
taking a plea
must be voluntary and intelligent
on the record
must know: nature of charge, max penalty/man. min, can plead not guilty
double jeopardy
attaches at empaneling of jury
exceptions: hung jury, discontinued and retried for menifest necessity, state CAN retry a D that appealed conviction UNLESS the reversal wa sinsufficeint evidence.
breach of plea bargain
when crimes are seperate under double jeopardy
req an additional element
when you borrow object and later decide to keep, but then decide to give back, is that larceny
no, larceny intent must happen at the moment of taking
is negligent entrustment admissible character evidence
yes
is D guilty when victim cause of death is caused by D AND something else
Yes
when judge is making a ruling on admissibility of accused confession….
judge must excuse jury
judge makes determination
