Criminal Law Flashcards
VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
WOULD BE MURDER BUT FOR ADEQUATE PROVOCATION—DEFINED AS:
- One that would arouse sudden & intense passion in the mind of an ordinary person such to cause him to lose self-control;
- D was in fact provoked
- No sufficient time b/w the provocation & killing for the passions of a reasonable person to cool; &
- D in fact did NOT cool off b/w provocation & killing.
THE IMPERFECT SELF-DEFENSE RULE
- Honest
- But unreasonable belief
- That his life was in imminent danger…
- Then Murder reduced to Manslaughter.
- Only some states recognize this doctrine
INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER:
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE [CL]
MPC—RECKLESS [CONSCIOUS DISREGARD FOR SUBSTANTIAL & UNJUSTIFIABLE RISK]
1. A killing committed w/ criminal negligence (“Reckless under MPC”) OR
2. Misdemeanor manslaughter (kill while committing a misdemeanor/unenumerated felony)
FIRST DEGREE MURDER
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN CONDUCT
- Deliberate & premeditated killing of human in which D acted w/ intent or knowledge that his conduct would cause death. OR
- Felony Murder: any killing (except co-felon) committed during the course of a felony (other than murder) up to the point of temporary safety; OR
- Homicide of Cop: D knew victim is a law enforcement, & victim was acting in the line of duty; AND
- But for D’s conduct, the death would not have occurred (cause in fact)
- D is proximate case, i.e., D responsible for all results that occur as a natural & probable consequence of his conduct, even if he did not anticipate the exact manner in which they would occur.
SECOND DEGREE MURDER
(CL MURDER/MALICE INTENT):
- Depraved heart: killing done w/ reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life; OR
- Murders that ≠ 1st D
- But for D’s conduct, the death would not have occurred (cause in fact)
- D is proximate case, i.e., D responsible for all results that occur as a natural & probable consequence of his conduct, even if he did not anticipate the exact manner in which they would occur.
INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER M’NAUGHTEN
- Disease of the mind
- Caused a defeat of reason
- Where @ time of crime D didn’t know the wrongfulness of his actions or understand the nature and quality of his actions
INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER IRRESISTIBLE IMPULSE TEST:
- B/c of mental illness
- D was unable to control his actions or conform his conduct to the law (i.e., lacked capacity for self-control & free choice)
INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER DURHAM/NEW HAMPSHIRE TEST:
- D conduct is a product of mental illness. (BUT FOR the mental illness, D wouldn’t of done the act)
INSANITY DEFENSE UNDER M.P.C TEST:
- D had a mental disease/defect, as a result
- D lacked the capacity to
- Appreciate the criminally of his conduct or conform his conduct to the law
BATTERY:
AWARENESS OF ACTING IN PROSCRIBED MANNER
- Unlawful application of force to the person resulting in either
- Bodily injury or offensive touching
- Need not be intentional
- Force applied w/ criminal negligence suffices
- Force need not be directly applied
Reasonable Belief Defenses
- Self defense;
- Duress;
- Necessity;
- Mistake of fact (reasonable)
TRANSFERRED INTENT APPLIES TO:
- Homicide
- Battery AND
- Arson
NAME TWO STRICT LIABILITY CRIMES:
CONSCIOUS COMMISSION OF PROSCRIBED ACT
- Statutory rape;
- Selling alcohol to minors, conscious commission of proscribed act, aka no intent crimes, any defense that negates intention not a defense to no intent crimes of strict liability
- If the crime = administrative, regulatory, or morality area & statute doesn’t have knowingly, willfully or intentionally → strict liability.
Defenses that Don’t apply to strict liability crimes?
- Defenses:
- Constitutional defenses on statute being vague
- Not:
- No Mistake of Fact
- No Consent
- No Intent required
- State of mind is irrelevant
Arson
RECKLESS DISREGARD OF A KNOWN RISK
- The malicious (intentional or w/ reckless disregard of an obvious/known risk)
- Burning (requiring some damage to the structure caused by fire)
- Of the dwelling
- Of another
- As for the malice –no specific intent is required, acting w/ a reckless indifference of an obvious risk that structure would burn will suffice for culpability
- Malice Intent: reckless disregard of an obvious/known risk
- Transferred intent applies
- Must be burned, not just smoke damage
- Scorching is insufficient, but charring is sufficient
Murder (CL)
RECKLESS DISREGARD OF A KNOWN RISK
- Unlawful killing of another human:
- W/ malice aforethought:
- Intent to inflict great bodily harm; or
- Intent to commit a felony (felony murder); or
- Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life
Intent required for specific intent crimes
intent to engage in the conduct
Solicitation
intent to engage in the conduct
- Inciting another to commit a crime
- With the intent that person solicited commits the crime
- No factual impossibility
- Defenses: voluntary intoxication; mistake of fact reasonable/unreasonable
Conspiracy
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- Agreement btw 2 + parties;
- Intent to enter into agreement; AND
- Intent by at least 2 people to achieve the object of agreement
- Object must be either criminal OR the achievement of a lawful object by criminal means
- Defenses: voluntary intoxication; mistake of fact reasonable/unreasonable
- No factual impossibility
- WITHDRAWAL, EVEN IF IT IS ADEQUATE, CAN NEVER RELIEVE THE DEFENDANT FROM LIABILITY FOR THE CONSPIRACY ITSELF
Attempt
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
To be criminal liable there must be:
1. An act done;
2. With intent to commit a crime;
3. That falls short of completing the crime
- Specific intent + overt act in furtherance
- Nowhere statute says negligent or recklessness.
- Defenses: voluntary intoxication; unreasonable mistake of fact, reasonable mistake of fact
- Overt act must = substantial step in furtherance of the commission of the crime
- Defenses: legal impossibility; voluntary intoxication; mistake of fact
- No abandonment (majority) defense once substantial step toward crime commission.
- Abandonment (M.P.C) allows only if voluntary & complete renunciation of criminal purpose.
- No factual impossibility
First-Degree Murder
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- Deliberate &
- Premeditated killing
- D acted w/ intent or knowledge that his conduct would cause death.
Assault
Intent to Engage in the conduct
- An attempt to commit a battery or
- Intentional creation of reasonable apprehension of imminent bodily harm (other than mere words)
- Defenses: voluntary intoxication; mistake of fact;
Larceny
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- A taking
- And carrying away
- Of tangible personal property
- Of another w/ possession
- By trespass (w/o consent or consent induced by fraud)
- w/ the intent to permanently deprive that person their interest in the property (at the time of the taking)
- Defense: mistake of fact; no defense of mistake of law
Embezzlement
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- The fraudulent;
- Conversion;
- Of personal property;
- Of another;
- By a person in lawful possession of that property
- Lawful possession + illegal conversion
False Pretenses
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- Obtaining title;
- To personal property of another;
- By an intentional false statement;
- Of a past/existing fact;
- W/ the intent to defraud the other.
Robbery
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- A taking;
- Of personal property
- Of another;
- From the other person’s presence;
- By force/threats of immediate death or injury
- With the intent to permanently deprive him of it.
Burglary
INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- A breaking
- And entering
- Of a dwelling
- Of another
- At nighttime
- W/ the intent to commit a felony
Forgery
: INTENT TO ENGAGE IN THE CONDUCT
- The making or
- Altering
- Of a false writing
- W/ intent to defraud.
- Any writing w/ apparent legal significance suffices
False Imprisionment
AWARENESS OF ACTING IN PROSCRIBED MANNER
- Unlawful confinement
- Of a person
- Without his valid consent.
- Defenses:
- Reasonable mistake of fact
Kidnapping
AWARENESS OF ACTING IN PROSCRIBED MANNER
- Unlawful confinement of a person that involves either;
- Some movement of the victim or concealment of the victim in a secret place
- Defenses:
- Reasonable mistake of fact
Rape
AWARENESS OF ACTING IN PROSCRIBED MANNER
- Slightest penetration
- Defenses:
- Reasonable mistake of fact
Statutory Rape
CONSCIOUS COMMISSION OF PROSCRIBED ACT
- Strict liability crime
- Consent of the victim is no defense and mistake of fact is no defense.
Extortion (CL)
- Knowingly seeking
- To obtain property or services
- By means of a future threat
- No need to take anything from the person/in presence
- Threats not imminent (unlike robbery)
Receipt of Stolen Property
- Receiving possession & control
- Of stolen personal property
- At the time D receives it
- Known to have been illegally obtained
- By another person
- W/ the intent to permanently deprive the owner
