Criminal Law

Question 1

3 Elements of an Offense

Answer 1

1. Actus Reus (voluntary act or culpable omission
2. Mens Rea (defendant’s state of mind at the time of the voluntary act or omission
3. Result (if required at the time of the voluntary act or omission

Question 2

Strict Liability

Answer 2

Liability that does not depend on any intent or actual negligence to cause harm

Ex, Pharma, Statutory Rape

Question 3

Ignorance/Mistake of Law

Answer 3

The general Rule is that Mistake of Law is not a defense but under the MPC, Def must have correctly interpreted the law and engaged in* reasonable reliability* of the official statement of the law. Then after the act, the statute is found to be erroneous

Cannot use Mistake of law defense when you incorrectly interpreted the statute

Question 4

When mistake of fact can be a defense

Answer 4

when it negates the mens rea

Ex.
mannequin, never intended to kill a person but intended to shoot the mannequin

Question 5

When a mistake of fact is not a defense

Answer 5

when it does not negate the mens rea

Question 6

Intent to Kill Murder

Answer 6

defendant had either purpose or knowledge (practical certainty) that death would result

Half of the jurisdictions bifurcate Intent to Kill Murder either in the 1st or 2nd degree

Question 7

Voluntary Manslaughter

Answer 7

an intentional killing in the heat of passion due to a legally adequate provocation

Question 8

Common Law Approach to Voluntary Manslaughter

Categorical/Traditional Approach to Voluntary Manslaughter

Answer 8

1. Must be the type of provocation that would drive a reasonable person into a hot-blooded rage. (objective)
2. Defendant must have been driven into a hot-blooded rage. (subjective)
3. There must not have been enough time for a reasonable person to cool off. (objective)
4. Defendant must not have had enough time to cool off and was acting in a hot-blooded rage. (subjective)

Categorical Approach to legally adequate provocation
1 adultery
2. severe battery
3. mutual combat
4. infliction of horrible injury upon a loved one
5. false arrest
6. extreme assault
7. informational words

Question 9

MPC Approach to Voluntary Manslaughter

Is there a cooling off period?

Pro defendant or pro prosecutor?

Answer 9

an intentional killing committed under the influence of an extreme emotional or mental disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse for

no cooling off time

pro- defendant approach

Question 10

Involuntary manslaughter (both mens rea req)

Answer 10

accidentally killing someone as the result of recklessness or gross negligence

Question 11

Recklessness approach to Involuntary Manslaughter

Answer 11

(half of jurisdictions follow )Recklessness - when the defendant was consicouly aware of the large and unjustifiable risk but they do it anyway

Question 12

Gross negligence

Answer 12

Damn negligence - gross negligence doesn’t require you proving what was going on inside of the defendant’s head; he was just stupid.

Question 13

Depraved Heart Murder

Answer 13

Not purposely or knowingly committed but caused by extreme recklessness / recklessness that shows extreme indifference to the value of human life

Question 14

Intent to Inflict Great Bodily Harm Murder

Answer 14

you had no purpose to kill, you had no practical certainty of killing someone but you had intent to inflict serious bodily harm to an individual

Question 15

Felony Murder

Answer 15

No Mens Rea Requirment at all for killing

Just have to prove mens rea for the predicate felony

Burglary
Arson
Robbery
Rape
Kidnapping
Felonious Escape

Question 16

When Does Felony Murder Apply

Answer 16

when your:

attempting an independent felony (substantial step)

committing the felony

immediate flight of felony (doesn’t matter if you completed it)

Question 17

Felony Murder

Agency Doctrine

(co-felon Liabilities)

Answer 17

the killing must be in furtherance of the felony for co-felons to be liable for felony murder.

Ex. If Teeter kills Batra because Batra was sneezing and he was worried his sneezing would wake up Dittfurth, the victim, then Teeter’s reasoning for killing Batra was in furtherance of the burglary. Under this set of facts, Kauffman is guilty of felony murder.

Question 18

Affirmative Defense for Co-Felons under Felony Murder

Answer 18

Majority of jurisdictions follow as prosecution does not have to prove mens reas

1. Def has to prove he was not armed with a deadly weapon
2. he did not know his co-felons were armed with deadly weapons
3. he did not participate in the actual killing itself
4. he had no reason to believe his co-felons were going to kill somebody

Question 19

Mens Rea Requirements for Attempted Murder

Answer 19

1. Specific Intent to Kill
2. Practical certainty that your actions will kill them

Ex. Serial Rapist With Aids

There’s no shred of evidence that he had specific intent to kill the women he raped; he had no practical certainty that raping them would kill them

Consider the facts – is death by AIDS a probable result of killing someone like shooting someone in the head??

NO! Which means there’s no practical certainty that
his actions were a death sentence

Question 20

Attempted Involuntary Manslaughter

Answer 20

you cant attempt to make a stupid mistake that kills someone

Question 21

Attempted Voluntary Manslaughter

Answer 21

you can attempt

(you cannot find a defendant guilty for Attempted Involuntary Manslaughter)

ex: catching your spouse in the act of adultery - takes out gun, shoots, but misses

Question 22

Majority Rule: MPC Substantial Step for attempt

Answer 22

In half of the states, there must have been a substantial step taken by the defendant that was strongly corroborative of his criminal purpose

Question 23

Abandonment

Answer 23

You can abandon your criminal purpose, but it must be voluntary and complete

only applies if you crossed the line from preparation to attempt.

LOTS OF CONFUSION AND CONFLICT

Question 24

Voluntary Abandonment

Answer 24

not Voluntary Abandonment if you were motivated in part by new awareness of circumstances that would make the crime more difficult to commit or make your apprehension more likely

Ex,
Your are about to rob Scott and you see his AR and bounce

Question 25

Complete Abandonment

Answer 25

Not complete abandonment if your merely postponing the crime or transfer the crime to another victim/object

Ex, You go to rob Liu but then see Garcia nearby with some better gold and so you trade victims

Question 26

Impossibility Defense

Answer 26

Under the MPC Impossibility is NOT a defense

Would the crime have been committed if the facts had been as the defendant believed??

Ex.
if you honestly believe tomatoes are poisonous, and you try to give it to someone with the intent to kill them, you COULD be convicted for
attempted murder because if the facts were as you believed, then the tomato would have killed them.

Question 27

When can you use physical force as self defense?

Answer 27

When you honestly and reasonably believe there’s an imminent threat of unlawful force against you

Question 28

when can you use deadly force in self-defense?

Answer 28

When you both honestly and reasonably believe that your are in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm

Question 29

If you honestly but UNREASONABLY believed someone was going to kill you?

Answer 29

Majority: You’re guilty for intent to kill murder

Minority: You’re guilty for voluntary manslaughter

Teeny Minority: You’re guilty for involuntary manslaughter

Question 30

Reasonable Person standard (self-defense)

(deep think)

Answer 30

NY Statute: you do have the right to use deadly force if being robbed – but would a reasonable person have acted like Goetz did in that situation?

Teeter might include some custom in the essay that made conduct seem typical, but just because something is custom does NOT make it reasonable.

a. Subconscious racism has nothing to do with logic or reason, even if all the baby boomers were racist

Question 31

Imminence

Answer 31

You must have reasonably believed that right then and there someone was going to inflict deadly force on you

• not met when someone is sleeping

Question 32

Does the honest and reasonable belief or mistake transfer to a 3rd party?

Answer 32

Yes, if you honestly and reasonably believed that a person would be attacked, so you stepped in to help them

you can get off liability even if you made a mistake

Question 33

Duty to Retreat

When is it an issue?

Majority v. Minority

Answer 33

Only applies when you are going to use deadly force

Majority: Stand Your Ground

Minority: Safe Retreat, must retreat only if you know with 100% certainty that you can do so completely safe

Question 34

Exception to Safe Retreat jurisdictions (self-defense)

Answer 34

Castle Doctrine: No retreat in some ones home or dwelling

Question 35

When should people be able to use deadly force against burgulars

(deep think)

Answer 35

CALIFORNIA LAW: Criminal Code justifies homicide if you’re trying to prevent someone intended to commit ANY felony.

The entry needs to be unlawful and forcible.
a. Think about how insane it is to kill someone who’s committing ANY felony
(like a bank robbery)

b. Under CA law, we are cloaking the defendant for him with the presumption that he had and honest and reasonable fear of imminent death

c. Rebuttable Defense: CA law might be a good way of protecting everyday people from burglaries, but couldn’t it also reign in the psychos too?

ii. COLORADO LAW: Homicide is justified so long as you have a reasonable belief that the individual will commit a crime and a reasonable belief that they will use SOME force. The entry only needs to be unlawful.

a. Think about how much more room you have now to exterminate someone

b. Deep Think: If you had your front door wide open and an old man with Alzheimers walks into your house unlawfully, you’d be justified in killing him in Colorado.

iii. Popular Approach: It runs with the gambit from a number of states to greatly expand the ability to use deadly force against burglars.

Question 36

Burglary

Answer 36

unlawful entrance to a building with intent to committ a crime therein

Question 37

Unconscioussness

(defense)

Answer 37

Is a complete defense to a charge of criminal homicide

People v. Newton – Unconscious Killing
● Did Newton shoot the officer before he became unconscious due to shock, or afterward?
● If Newton was unconscious before the shooting, the act of killing the officer was NOT
VOLUNTARY and thus he can’t be guilty of Voluntary Manslaughter
● Where it’s not self-induced, unconsciousness is a complete defense to a charge of criminal homicide

Question 38

Self Defense for Provocateurs

Answer 38

1. Peterson approach: If you provoke a confrontation with someone and you are not using deadly force, but they respond with deadly force, once you communicate to the deadly force aggressor an intent to withdraw and in good faith attempt to do so, your right of self-defense is restored.
2. Majority approach: If you provoke a confrontation with someone, there is never a restoration of deadly self-defense.
3. La Fave approach: If you provoke someone with non-deadly force and the other guy responds with deadly force you have a right to use deadly force in self-defense. <- a number of jurisdictions adopt.