Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Bar Refresher > Crimlaw > Flashcards

Crimlaw Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards
1
Q

JURISDICTION
definition

[overview]

A

= a person may be tried in any state that has a connection to the crime, including the state where the criminal act/omission occurred and/or the state where the harmful result

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

JURISDICTION
A, while stealing B’s car in Bristol, Virginia, stabs B and forces B into the trunk. A then drives B’s car toward the Tennessee state line. B dies in Bristol, Tennessee. A is tried for murder in Virginia and Tennessee. A moves to dismiss both cases for lack of jurisdiction. Should either case be dismissed?

[overview]

A

No, because a state has jurisdiction when the offense is committed wholly or partly within the state.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

MERGER DOCTRINE
definition

[overview]

A

= an accused may be convicted for only one offense despite the fact that he committed multiple offense

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

MERGER DOCTRINE
2 uses of merger

[overview]

A
  1. Inchoate crimes

2. Less included offenses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

MERGER OF INCHOATE CRIMES
merger of solicitation

[merger doctrine // overview]

A

solicitation merges into conspiracy/attempt/completed crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

MERGER OF INCHOATE CRIMES
merger of attempt

[merger doctrine // overview]

A

attempt merges into completed crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

MERGER OF INCHOATE CRIMES
merger of conspiracy

[merger doctrine // overview]

A

TRICK.

conspiracy DOESN’T merge attempt or the completed crime

EX = a person may be convicted of murder and conspiracy to commit murder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

MERGER OF LESSER INCLUDED CRIMES
definition of lesser included offenses

[merger doctrine // overview]

A

= one that consists entirely of SOME BUT NOT ALL elements of the greater offense

EX = Crime 1 requires proof of elements A, B, and C. Crime 2 requires proof of elements A, B, C, and D. In this case, Crime 1 is a lesser included offense of Crime 2.

NOT EX = Crime 1 requires proof of elements A, B, and C. Crime 2 requires proof of elements B, C, and D. In this case, Crime 1 is not a lesser included offense of Crime 2, and Crime 2 is not a lesser included offense of Crime 1. Crime 1 and Crime 2 are two distinct crimes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

MERGER OF LESSER INCLUDED CRIMES
merger into robbery

[merger doctrine // overview]

A

larceny and assault/battery merge into robbery/attempted robbery

(b/c all of the elements of both larceny and assault/battery must be proved for robbery/attempted robbery)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

MERGER OF LESSER INCLUDED CRIMES
merger into felony-murder

[merger doctrine // overview]

A

the underlying felony (ex = robbery) merges into felony-murder, assuming there is only one victim

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

MERGER OF LESSER INCLUDED CRIMES
merger into reckless driving/DUI

[merger doctrine // overview]

A

TRICK.

does not merge into involuntary manslaughter (even where the reckless driving caused the death)
(b/c each crime requires proof of at least one distinct element—a person may be convicted of reckless driving without causing a death and may be convicted of involuntary manslaughter without using a vehicle)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

ELEMENTS OF A CRIME
4 elements of a crime

[overview]

A
  1. Physical act
  2. Mental state
  3. Concurrence of physical act/mental state
  4. Causation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

PHYSICAL ACT aka ACTUS REUS
definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= a willed muscular movement of D

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

PHYSICAL ACT aka ACTUS REUS
acts that do not constitute actus reus

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Sleepwalking
  2. Reflexes
  3. Convulsions
  4. Hypnosis
  5. Being physically forced by another (ex = A pushes B into C, A is guilty of battery but not B)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

PHYSICAL ACT aka ACTUS REUS
omissions as actus reus

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

As a general rule, a person’s failure to act will not constitute a crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
4 mental states for criminal liability recognized at common law

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Specific intent crimes
  2. Malice crimes
  3. General intent crimes
  4. Strict liability crimes

+ crimlaw recognizes the doctrine of transferred intent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
is transferred intent recognized in crimlaw?

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

Yes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
in what cases is the transferred intent doctrine most often applied?

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  • Homicide
  • Assault
  • Battery
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
to what does the transferred intent doctrine NOT apply?

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

Attempt

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
specific intent crimes - definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= crimes for which the prosecution must prove the accused’s intent as a separate element

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
specific intent crimes - 4 types

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. All theft and lying crimes (larceny/robbery/burglary/forgery/false pretenses/embezzlement/bribery/perjury)
  2. All inchoate crimes (solicitation/conspiracy/attempt)
  3. First degree murder in states with statute differentiating degrees of murder
  4. Accomplice liability

PRO TIP = mental state of such crimes is frequently tested, gotta memorize this

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
specific intent crimes - 8 theft and lying crimes

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Larceny
  2. Robbery
  3. Burglary
  4. Forgery
  5. false pretenses
  6. Embezzlement
  7. Bribery
  8. Perjury
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
specific intent crimes - 3 inchoate crimes

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Solicitation
  2. Conspiracy
  3. Attempt
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
2 defenses available only to specific intent crimes

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Voluntary intoxication

2. Unreasonable mistake of fact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
malice crimes - definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= crimes in which the accused acted with extreme recklessness (at least)

TEST TIP = if you gotta ask, it’s gonna be extreme (not ordinary) recklessness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
malice crimes - 5 types

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Common law murder
  2. Second degree murder in states with statutes differentiating degrees of murder
  3. Arson
  4. Malicious mischief
  5. House burning
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
general intent crimes - definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= crimes in which the accused acted with at least ordinary recklessness OR gross negligence

TEST TIPS

  • if you gotta ask = it’s gonna be extreme (not ordinary) recklessness
  • mental state requirement of crime is unclear = general intent is default
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
general intent crimes - 9 types

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

All crimes that do not require specific intent or malice, including

  1. Battery
  2. Rape
  3. Kidnapping
  4. False imprisonment
  5. Mayhem
  6. Voluntary manslaughter
  7. Involuntary manslaughter
  8. Assault (of the “threat” kind)
  9. Reckless driving
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
strict liability crimes - definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= crime in which the accused’s mental state is irrelevant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
strict liability crimes - 5 types

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Statutory rape
  2. Selling or providing liquor to minors
  3. Bigamy
  4. DWI/DUI/most other traffic violations that are criminal in nature
  5. Many regulatory/environmental/public welfare offenses (ex = selling impure or adulterated food or alcohol)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

MENS REA @ COMMON LAW
strict liability crimes - 3 key takeaways on available defenses

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  • Very few defenses to strict liability crimes
  • Mistake of fact is not a defense
  • But insanity may be a defense
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

MENTAL STATES under MPC
4 mental states for criminal liability under MPC

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  1. Purposely
  2. Knowingly or willfully
  3. Recklessly
  4. Negligence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

MENTAL STATES under MPC
purposely definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= CONSCIOUS INTENT to either engage in/cause CERTAIN conduct/result

(EX = A shot B b/c A wanted B to die)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

MENTAL STATES under MPC
knowingly/willfully definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= AWARE that conduct will or LIKELY WILL cause a certain result
when conduct OVERWHELMINGLY LIKELY to produce a result

NOTE = reasonable OR unreasonable mistake of fact is defense

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

MENTAL STATES under MPC
recklessly definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= CONSCIOUS DISREGARD of a substantial or unjustifiable risk
that constitutes a GROSS DEVIATION from standard of care of reasonable person
with knowledge that injury might result

NOTE = default mental state under MPC

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

MENTAL STATES under MPC
negligence definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= FAILURE TO BE AWARE of a substantial and unjustifiable risk
and such failure is a SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION from the standard of care of a reasonable person

NOTE = higher standard than negligence in tort law—probably close to tort law’s gross negligence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

MENTAL STATES under MPC
what mental state allows reasonable OR unreasonable mistake of fact as defense?

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

Knowingly/willfully

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

MENTAL STATES under MPC
default mental state

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

Recklessly

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

CONCURRENCE OF PHYSICAL ACT + MENTAL STATE
definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= D must have the necessary mental state at the time he committed the act constituting the crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

CAUSATION
definition

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= to be found guilty, D’s criminal act must be both the ACTUAL/but-for cause and the PROXIMATE cause

NOTE = technically, causation is an element of all crimes but causation issues usually arise in “result” crimes (like homicide)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

CAUSATION
actual cause in murder/manslaughter

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

= But for D’s act, V would not have died WHEN HE DID

  • D is actual cause of murder/manslaughter if D’s criminal act SHORTENS V’s life
  • D may be actual cause of murder/manslaughter if D’s criminal act LENGTHENS V’s life in rare cases
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

CAUSATION
effect of intervening act on causation

[elements of a crime // overview]

A

Breaks the chain of causation from the original act to the death ONLY IF the intervening force was so out-of-the-ordinary that it’s no longer fair to hold D criminally responsible for the outcome

Ordinarily negligent acts/omissions of 3P (ex = doctor or rescuer) OR victim are not sufficient to break the chain of causation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

CAUSATION
intervening act majority view

[elements of a crime // overview]

A
  • Intervening act must be so ABNORMAL OR BIZARRE that it is TRULY UNFORESEEABLE
  • Ordinarily negligent acts/omissions of 3P (ex = doctor or rescuer) OR victim are not sufficient to break the chain of causation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

DEFENSES NEGATING CAPACITY
3 types

[overview]

A
  1. Insanity
  2. Intoxication
  3. Infancy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
3 insanity tests

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A
  1. M’Naghten rule
  2. Irresistible impulse test
  3. MPC test
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
majority approach

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

M’Naghten rule

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
federal courts approach

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

M’Naghten rule

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
insufficient disease/defect for insanity defenses

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

Insanity defenses can’t be based on abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct
= psychopaths and sociopaths aren’t eligible for insanity defenses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
m’naghten rule

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

(majority and federal courts approach)

At the time of the crime

  1. the accused suffered from a MENTAL DISEASE/DEFECT
  2. AND the accused DIDN’T KNOW what he was doing was LEGALLY WRONG

NOTE = D is not entitled to acquittal merely b/c he believes his acts are morally right (D must not know his acts are legally wrong)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
irresistible impulse test

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

At the time of the crime

  1. the accused from a mental disease/defect
  2. AND the accused may have known his act was wrong but couldn’t resist
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
MPC test

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

D is not guilty if he can satisfy EITHER

a. M’NAGHTEN RULE or
b. IRRESISTIBLE IMPULSE TEST

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
burden of proof for insanity defenses

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

State may require accused to prove insanity as an affirmative defense by EITHER

a. a preponderance of the evidence
b. clear and convincing evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
incompetency to stand trial standard

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

= if the accused is unable to

a. understand the nature of proceedings OR
b. assist his counsel

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

INSANITY DEFENSE
incompetency to stand trial burden of proof

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

State may require accused to prove incompetency by a preponderance
BUT NOT by clear and convincing evidence (b/c DP violation)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

INTOXICATION DEFENSE
2 types of intoxication

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A
  1. Voluntary intoxication

2. Involuntary intoxication

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

INTOXICATION DEFENSE
voluntary intoxication definition

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

= intoxication by drugs or alcohol

  1. that is self-induced AND
  2. taken without duress
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

INTOXICATION DEFENSE
voluntary intoxication as a defense

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

Defense to SPECIFIC INTENT crimes only

LIQUID COURAGE EXCEPTION = voluntary intoxication isn’t a defense to ANY crime if the accused used alcohol or drugs to build up his nerve or courage to commit the crime

(AKA not a defense to general intent + malice + strict liability crimes)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

INTOXICATION DEFENSE
involuntary intoxication definition

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

Taking an intoxication substance

a. w/o knowledge of its property OR
b. under duress imposed by another OR
c. pursuant to medical advice and w/o knowledge of its intoxicating effects

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

INTOXICATION DEFENSE
involuntary intoxication as a defense

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A

Treated the same as insanity

= defense to nearly all crimes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

INFANCY DEFENSE
availability @ common law

[defenses negating capacity // overview]

A
  • Under age 7 = no criminal liability
  • Age 7-14 = rebuttable presumption of no criminal liability
  • Over age 14 = treated as adults
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

THE BASICS
9 types

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A
  1. Self-defense
  2. Defense of others
  3. Defense of property
  4. Necessity
  5. Duress
  6. Mistake/ignorance of fact
  7. Mistake/ignorance of law
  8. Consent
  9. Entrapment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

THE BASICS
burden of proof

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A
  • Generally considered affirmative defenses
  • D has burden of production and burden of persuasion
  • Usually by a preponderance of the evidence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

THE BASICS
victim’s contributory negligence

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Not a defense to any crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

THE BASICS
victim’s forgiveness

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Not a defense to any crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

SELF-DEFENSE
nondeadly force

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Person may use non-deadly force where

  1. REASONABLY NECESSARY
  2. to protect one’s self from IMMINENT use
  3. of UNLAWFUL force

Duty to retreat before using nondeadly force = no

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

SELF-DEFENSE
preemptive self-defense

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

For self-defense (and defense of others), D may NOT act out in PREEMPTION or RETALIATION

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

SELF-DEFENSE
retaliatory self-defense

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

For self-defense (and defense of others), D may NOT act out in PREEMPTION or RETALIATION

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

SELF-DEFENSE
deadly force

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

A person may use deadly force when she

  1. Is confronted with IMMINENT DEATH or SERIOUS BODILY HARM and
  2. Was NOT the AGGRESSOR and
  3. Is confronted with UNLAWFUL force

Duty to retreat before using deadly force

  • Majority view = no
  • Minority/MPC = yes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

SELF-DEFENSE
duty to retreat

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A
  • Nondeadly force = no duty to retreat before using nondeadly force in self-defense
  • Deadly force majority approach = no duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense
  • Deadly force minority view = there’s a duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense unless the person using self-defense is in her own home
  • Deadly force MPC rule = same as minority view
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q

SELF-DEFENSE
amount of force used

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

If too much force is used, self-defense is not available as a defense

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

DEFENSE OF OTHERS
requirements

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Defense of others applies if the accused REASONABLY believed that another person was being attacked (and thus that person could have used self-defense)

majority view = the defense is NOT negated by the fact that the other person was not entitled to use self-defense, as long as accused reasonably believed so

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

DEFENSE OF PROPERTY
deadly force

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

A person may NOT use deadly force solely to defend property
EXAMPLE = spring guns

DWELLING EXCEPTION = A person may defend his or her HOME with deadly force

a. to protect those inside from personal attack by violent or riotous entry OR
b. to prevent someone from entering for the purpose of committing a felony

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

DEFENSE OF PROPERTY
nondeadly force

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Reasonable nondeadly force may be used to either

a. regain possession of property if
1. that property was WRONGFULLY taken
2. from a person’s IMMEDIATE possession AND
3. the person DEMANDS return of the property BEFORE using such force (OR such a demand is OBVIOUSLY FUTILE)
b. OR defend property in one’s possession IF the need to use force REASONABLY APPEARS IMMINENT

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q

NECESSITY
requirements

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

A person may use the defense of necessity if he
REASONABLY believes
1. that his conduct was NECESSARY to avoid some greater harm AND
2. he has NO other LAWFUL ALTERNATIVE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
75
Q

NECESSITY
sufficient causes

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Generally, the necessity must result from
A. pressure from physical forces of NATURE or
B. HEALTH-based emergencies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

NECESSITY
in what 2 instances is necessity NOT a defense?

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A
  1. Never a defense to HOMICIDE

2. Can’t be used if D was AT FAULT IN CREATING the necessity (ex = taking a sailboat out despite hurricane warnings)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
77
Q

DURESS
requirements

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

If a person OR a member of his family is subject to PHYSICAL duress, this excuses the crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q

DURESS
definition of physical duress

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

SERIOUS violence OR

Threats of IMMEDIATE serious violence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
79
Q

DURESS
2 instances in which duress may NOT be used as a defense

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A
  1. Never as a defense for intentional homicide
    EXCEPTION = may be used as a defense for felony-murder if it would serve as a defense to the underlying felony
  2. Never as a defense where D RECKLESSLY placed himself in a situation in which it was PROBABLE that he would be subject to duress
    (EX = by joining a dangerous gang that is rumored to kill any member that defects)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q

MISTAKE/IGNORANCE OF FACT
reasonable mistake of fact

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

a reasonable mistake that NEGATES an ELEMENT of the crime is a defense to ALL CRIMES EXCEPT STRICT LIABILITY crimes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
81
Q

MISTAKE/IGNORANCE OF FACT
unreasonable mistake of fact

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

an UNREASONABLE mistake that NEGATES an ELEMENT of the crime is a defense ONLY TO SPECIFIC INTENT crimes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
82
Q

MISTAKE/IGNORANCE OF LAW
availability of mistake/ignorance of law defense

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Mistake or ignorance of law is rarely a defense
BUT there are a few minor exceptions
1. the law was not adequately published
2. the accused was relying on a judicial opinion that was later overturned
3. knowledge of the law is an “element” of the offense (which is quite rare)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
83
Q

CONSENT
availability of consent defense

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Consent is generally not a defense to a crime, unless it negates an element of the offense and then only as to

  1. rape and kidnapping (in certain situations)
  2. minor assaults and batteries (ex = a legal boxing match) BUT NOT serious batteries or homicide
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
84
Q

CONSENT
burden of proof

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

Some statutory crimes require prosecution to prove non-consent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
85
Q

ENTRAPMENT
requirements

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

D must show that

  1. the intent to commit the crime ORIGINATED with law enforcement AND
  2. D was NOT PREDISPOSED to commit the crime PRIOR to gov contact
86
Q

ENTRAPMENT
what evidentiary effect does this defense have?

[justifications + excuses + defenses]

A

allows the prosecution to introduce character evidence under FRE 405(b) to rebut character as an element of the defense

87
Q

THE BASICS
definition

[inchoate offenses]

A

= acts committed PRIOR TO and IN PREP OF a more serious offense

  • inchoate offenses are complete offenses, even though the act to be done may not yet have been completed
  • all inchoate offenses are SPECIFIC INTENT crimes
88
Q

THE BASICS
3 types

[inchoate offenses]

A
  1. Attempt
  2. Solicitation
  3. Conspiracy
89
Q

ATTEMPT
definition

[inchoate offenses]

A

An act or acts done with the intention of committing a crime, but which fall short of completing the crime

90
Q

ATTEMPT
elements

[inchoate offenses]

A
  1. SPECIFIC INTENT to commit a crime (even if the completed crime is not a specific intent crime)
  2. MPC/majority view = take SUBSTANTIAL STEP toward completing the crime (aka beyond mere preparation)
    OR
  3. @ common law = must come DANGEROUSLY CLOSE to successful completion of the crime
91
Q

ATTEMPT
merger

[inchoate offenses]

A

Attempt merges with the completed offense

= D may not be convicted of BOTH attempt and the completed crime assuming there is only one victim

92
Q

DEFENSES TO ATTEMPT
3 defenses

[attempt // inchoate offenses]

A
  1. Factual impossibility of success
  2. Legal impossibility
  3. Abandonment
93
Q

DEFENSES TO ATTEMPT
factual impossibility of success

[attempt // inchoate offenses]

A

Test = if the facts are as the accused believed them to be, would the accused be guilty of a crime?

If so, factual impossibility is not a defense to attempt

94
Q

DEFENSES TO ATTEMPT
legal impossibility of success

[attempt // inchoate offenses]

A
  • IS a defense, but quite rare
  • applies only in those situations where the completed act is not illegal (despite the fact that the accused thought it was illegal)
95
Q

DEFENSES TO ATTEMPT
distinguishing factual and legal impossibility

[attempt // inchoate offenses]

A

Factual impossibility and legal impossibility often look alike
(EX = D charged with murder for shooting a person he thought was alive but was already dead)

If unclear, most courts and the MPC assume D is asserting factual impossibility and thus is guilty of the crime

96
Q

DEFENSES TO ATTEMPT
abandonment

[attempt // inchoate offenses]

A

This is not a defense at common law

BUT is a defense under MPC if the abandonment/renunciation is complete and truly voluntary

97
Q

SOLICITATION
definition

[inchoate offenses]

A

= Urging, inciting, or asking another person to commit a crime with the specific intent that the crime be committed

(The offense of solicitation is complete upon the asking or inciting)

98
Q

SOLICITATION
4 things that are NOT a defense to solicitation

[inchoate offenses]

A
  1. the other person was incapable of committing the crime (e.g., was a police officer)
  2. the person asked to commit the crime is acquitted of the crime
  3. the person asked to commit the crime fails to complete it
  4. that the solicitor renounces or withdraws the solicitation (even if before the solicited crime is committed)
    BUT MPC recognizes renunciation as a defense if the soliciting party prevents commission of the crime
99
Q

SOLICITATION
complicity

[inchoate offenses]

A

If the crime is committed, the solicitor is guilty of the crime as an accomplice

100
Q

SOLICITATION
merger

[inchoate offenses]

A

Solicitation merges with conspiracy, attempt, and the completed offense

101
Q

CONSPIRACY
definition

[inchoate offenses]

A

= agreement between 2+ people to commit a crime

102
Q

CONSPIRACY
elements

[inchoate offenses]

A
  1. AGREEMENT (express or implied) btwn TWO+ people
  2. specific intent to enter into an AGREEMENT (aka words or actions indicating that D intended to join the conspiracy)
  3. specific intent to ACHIEVE the OBJECTIVE (aka successful completion of at least one crime) of the agreement
  4. an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy (any act by any conspirator—even one of mere preparation—is sufficient)
103
Q

CONSPIRACY
what is required to meet the element of specific intent to achieve objective?

[inchoate offenses]

A

common law
- requires 2 guilty minds
- the second person cannot be a police officer or someone working with the police
AKA the bilateral approach to conspiracy

MPC
- MPC requires only 1 guilty mind for conspiracy
AKA the unilateral approach to conspiracy

104
Q

CONSPIRACY
5 examples of overt acts

[inchoate offenses]

A
  1. stealing a getaway car
  2. buying a gun
  3. conducting a dry-run of the crime
  4. arranging an additional meeting of the conspirators
  5. checking a weather report for the day of the crime
105
Q

CONSPIRACY
when does the conspiracy end?

[inchoate offenses]

A

The conspiracy ends when the underlying offense is completed UNLESS the parties also explicitly planned to conceal the crime
BUT acts of concealment, by themselves, are not sufficient to continue the conspiracy

106
Q

CONSPIRACY
merger

[inchoate offenses]

A

Conspiracy does NOT merge with attempt or the completed crime

SO a person may be convicted of both conspiracy to commit murder and murder (or attempted murder)

107
Q

CONSPIRACY
criminal liability

[inchoate offenses]

A

All members of the conspiracy are liable for all foreseeable crimes committed in furtherance of the objectives of the conspiracy
(BUT are not liable for crimes committed before they joined the conspiracy)

108
Q

DEFENSES TO CONSPIRACY
impossibility of the crime defense

[conspiracy // inchoate offenses]

A

NOPE

doesn’t matter that actual commission of crime was impossible

109
Q

DEFENSES TO CONSPIRACY
4 available defenses

[conspiracy // inchoate offenses]

A
  1. Withdrawal from the conspiracy
  2. Protected persons
  3. Acquittal of co-conspirators
  4. Wharton rule
110
Q

DEFENSES TO CONSPIRACY
withdrawal from the conspiracy

[conspiracy // inchoate offenses]

A

@ common law

  • withdrawal from the conspiracy is never a defense to the conspiracy itself (crime is complete as soon as agreement made + overt act committed)
  • BUT can withdraw from FUTURE crimes committed in furtherance of the conspiracy if
    1. person AFFIRMATIVELY notifies all members of conspiracy with SUCH TIME that everyone has an OPP TO ABANDON his plans AND
    2. if the withdrawing conspirator has provided MATERIAL assistance, he or she must NEUTRALIZE the assistance OR NOTIFY the police

MPC recognizes complete and voluntary withdrawal as a defense to the conspiracy itself if the defendant thwarts the success of the conspiracy (EX = informs the police)

111
Q

DEFENSES TO CONSPIRACY
protected persons defense

[conspiracy // inchoate offenses]

A

If a statute is designed to protect a particular class, the protected person may not be convicted of solicitation, conspiracy, or accomplice liability for the completed offense EVEN IF the protected person solicits or aids in the crime and/or agrees to commit the crime

EXAMPLE = statutory rape laws are designed to protect underage victims and child labor laws are designed to protect children

112
Q

DEFENSES TO CONSPIRACY
effect of acquittal of co-conspirators

[conspiracy // inchoate offenses]

A

If all other members of the conspiracy are acquitted, the accused may not be convicted because he had no one with whom to conspire

113
Q

DEFENSES TO CONSPIRACY
wharton rule

[conspiracy // inchoate offenses]

A

If the crime, by its very nature, requires two persons, there is no additional liability for conspiracy, unless a third person agrees to participate

EXAMPLES = adultery, bribery, incest, dueling, and bigamy

114
Q

DEFENSES TO CONSPIRACY
drug deal as conspiracy

[conspiracy // inchoate offenses]

A

a simple agreement to buy drugs is generally insufficient to establish a conspiracy between the seller and buyer

115
Q

THE BASICS
types of parties to a crime

[accomplice liability]

A

Under modern law, 3 parties to a crime

  1. Principales
  2. Accomplices
  3. Accessories after the fact
116
Q

PRINCIPALES
definition

[accomplice liability]

A

= persons that engaged in the criminal act or omission with the required mental state

117
Q

ACCOMPLICES
definition

[accomplice liability]

A

= persons that aided, counseled, or encouraged the principales
WITH the intent that crime be committed

118
Q

ACCOMPLICES
timing of complicity

[accomplice liability]

A

such aid may occur either before or during the crime

119
Q

ACCOMPLICES
mental state

[accomplice liability]

A

accomplice liability requires that person giving aid/encouragement to principales SPECIFICALLY INTENDS that the crime be successfully COMPLETED
(EX = an accomplice to larceny must specifically intend that the owner be permanently deprived of the property)

AKA if the accomplice has some purpose other than successful completion of the crime, the accomplice is not guilty
(EX = to set a trap for the principal in which he is arrested)
BUT mere knowledge that a crime may result from assistance is generally not sufficient

120
Q

ACCOMPLICES
complicity of dupes

[accomplice liability]

A

a person used as an ignorant “dupe” is not an accomplice (and the person using the dupe is a principal)

121
Q

ACCOMPLICES
for what crimes are accomplices responsible?

[accomplice liability]

A

Accomplices are responsible for crimes they aid or encourage and for any other foreseeable (or probable) crimes committed during the course of the contemplated crime

(P.S. accomplices are often guilty of conspiracy as well)

122
Q

ACCOMPLICES
withdrawal of aid/assistance

[accomplice liability]

A

If an accomplice withdraws his or her aid/assistance before the crime is committed, this may be an effective defense, with the following caveats:

  1. if the accomplice MERELY ENCOURAGED the commission of the crime, the accomplice’s REPUDIATION of that encouragement is enough
  2. if the accomplice provided some MATERIAL ASSISTANCE (ex = getaway car), the accomplice must at least attempt to neutralize the assistance by retrieving the material
  3. if the above are impossible, the accomplice must notify the authorities or try to stop the crime before the chain of events leading to commission of crime occurs or becomes unstoppable
123
Q

ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT
definition

[accomplice liability]

A

= persons that assist felons in fleeing justice (felony must be complete at time aid is given) w/ purpose of preventing a conviction

(P.S. it’s a SEPARATE CRIME with its own punishment)

124
Q

ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT
who may be exempt from prosecution as accessories after the fact?

[accomplice liability]

A

close relatives of the felon are often exempt from prosecution

125
Q

THE BASICS
3 key offenses

[sex offenses]

A
  1. Rape
  2. Statutory rape
  3. Bigamy
126
Q

RAPE
definition

[sex offenses]

A

@ common law =

  1. Unlawful carnal knowledge
  2. of a woman
  3. by a man who is not her husband
  4. without her effective consent

Modern statutes =

  • renamed as “sexual assault” or “sexual battery”
  • made crime gender-neutral
  • dropped “not her husband” requirement (mostly)
127
Q

RAPE
proof of consent

[sex offenses]

A

@ common law = “non-consent” was an element of the crime for the prosecutor to prove

some modern statutes = consent is affirmative defense requiring D to prove both an honest AND reasonable belief that the victim consented

128
Q

RAPE
4 instances where consent is not valid

[sex offenses]

A

Consent is not valid when obtained:

  1. by FORCE
  2. by THREATS of force
  3. from someone W/O CAPACITY (ex = underage, drunk, asleep, insane)
  4. by FRAUD as to the nature of the “act” (ex = a doctor fraudulently telling his patient that the penetration was caused by a medical instrument)

BUT other types of fraud do not invalidate consent (ex = a man fraudulently telling a woman that he will marry her if she agrees to sex)

129
Q

STATUTORY RAPE
definition @ common law

[sex offenses]

A

sex acts with a person under the age of consent

130
Q

STATUTORY RAPE
mistake of fact defense

[sex offenses]

A

TRICK.

this is a strict liability crime, so mistake as to the victim’s age is no defense

131
Q

STATUTORY RAPE
culpability of a minor

[sex offenses]

A

Because statutory rape laws are designed to protect minors, the minor involved in a statutory rape CANNOT be found guilty:

  1. of CONSPIRACY to commit statutory rape
  2. of SOLICITATION of statutory rape
  3. as an ACCOMPLICE to statutory rape
132
Q

STATUTORY RAPE
intent required

[sex offenses]

A

statutory rape = strict liability crime

BUT attempted statutory rape = specific intent crime

133
Q

BIGAMY
definition @ common law

[dwelling offenses]

A

= marrying someone while still having a living spouse

134
Q

BIGAMY
2 takeaways

[dwelling offenses]

A

STRICT LIABILITY offense (= mistake as to survival of spouse or finality/effectiveness of divorce generally not a defense)

WHARTON RULE crime (= there can be no additional conviction of conspiracy if only 2 people—bigamist and new spouse—are involved

135
Q

THE BASICS
3 key crimes

[dwelling offenses]

A
  1. Burglary
  2. Arson
  3. House burning
136
Q

BURGLARY
5 requirements

[dwelling offenses]

A
  1. a breaking
  2. and entry
  3. of the dwelling of another (based on possession, not ownership)
  4. at night
  5. with the intent to commit a felony or larceny therein
137
Q

BURGLARY
definition of breaking (3 parts/things included in the definition)

[dwelling offenses]

A
  1. includes any OPENING or ENLARGING of locked/unlocked exterior/interior doors/windows
  2. includes UNAUTHORIZED use of keys
  3. may also occur CONSTRUCTIVELY by force, threats of force, fraud, or entry through a chimney
  4. must be PART OF THE DWELLING (a breaking of personal property, such as a portable safe or trunk, is not sufficient)
138
Q

BURGLARY
definition of entry

[dwelling offenses]

A

entry occurs if

  1. any part of the BODY breaks the plane of the structure or
  2. an INSTRUMENT used to COMMIT THE FELONY (as opposed to an instrument used to break in) breaks the plane of the structure
139
Q

BURGLARY
2 key takeaways

[dwelling offenses]

A
  1. specific intent crime = D MUST have the intent to commit a felony inside (but the felony need not be completed)
  2. D must have the intent to commit a felony in the dwelling AT THE TIME of the breaking
140
Q

BURGLARY
merger

[dwelling offenses]

A

If the accused enters a dwelling with the intent to commit a felony therein AND actually does commit a felony, the accused is guilty of burglary and the felony

AKA burglary and the underlying felony do not merge

141
Q

ARSON
definition

[dwelling offenses]

A

= Burning the dwelling of another (based on possession, not ownership) with malice

PRO TIP = MBE Qs often assume that the jurisdiction’s arson law applies to structures other than dwellings

142
Q

ARSON
3 key takeaways

[dwelling offenses]

A
  1. starting a fire accidentally but recklessly letting it burn may satisfy the mental state
  2. requires FIRE (a non-fire explosion, scorching, water damage, or smoke damage is not enough)
  3. requires CHARRING is to the FIBERS of the dwelling itself (not to personal property or fixtures in the dwelling AKA wood walls or floor, not carpet)
143
Q

HOUSE BURNING
4 elements

[dwelling offenses]

A
  1. BURNING of
  2. one’s OWN DWELLING
  3. with MALICE
  4. when the structure is in a city or town or SO NEAR to other homes as to CREATE A DANGER to these structures
144
Q

THE BASICS
2 key crimes

[other offenses]

A
  1. Perjury

2. Bribery

145
Q

PERJURY
definition

[other offenses]

A

= WILLFUL and CORRUPT taking of a FALSE OATH in a judicial proceeding

146
Q

PERJURY
3 key takeaways

[other offenses]

A
  1. SPECIFIC INTENT crime
  2. A statement that is alleged to be perjured must be MATERIAL
  3. NOT considered perjury if the witness RECANT BEFORE THE TRIAL ENDS
147
Q

BRIBERY
definition

[other offenses]

A

= CORRUPT PAYMENT/RECEIPT of anything of VALUE in return for OFFICIAL ACTION

148
Q

BRIBERY
3 key takeaways

[other offenses]

A
  1. both OFFERING or TAKING briber is crime under modern law
  2. SPECIFIC INTENT crime
  3. Wharton rule crime (only can be convicted of conspiracy to commit bribery if third person agrees to participate)
149
Q

THE BASICS
5 types of offenses against the person

[offenses against the person]

A
  1. Battery
  2. Assault
  3. Homicide
  4. Kidnapping
  5. False imprisonment
150
Q

BATTERY
definition

[offenses against the person]

A

= unlawful application of force to the person of another resulting in either bodily injury or an offensive touching

151
Q 
BATTERY 
2 takeaways (but are they key???? a question even science can't answer)

[offenses against the person]

A
  1. Battery is a general intent crime

2. Common law battery is a misdemeanor

152
Q

BATTERY
causation

[offenses against the person]

A

sufficient that
- D put into motion actions causing harm
- D caused the application of force with ordinary recklessness
(aka D is substantially certain harmful or offensive contact will occur)

153
Q

BATTERY
consent defense

[offenses against the person]

A

A victim may consent (assuming he or she has capacity) to a simple battery, but not to serious batteries or homicide

154
Q

ASSAULT
2 types of assault at common law

[offenses against the person]

A
  1. attempt to commit a battery (this is a specific intent crime)
  2. intentional creation (by more than mere words) of a reasonable apprehension in the victim’s mind of imminent bodily harm (this is a general intent crime)
155
Q

ASSAULT
2 KEY takeaways

[offenses against the person]

A
  1. Common law assault is a misdemeanor

2. Under modern law, the term “assault” is often used for both assaults and batteries

156
Q

HOMICIDE
5 homicide offenses

[offenses against the person]

A
  1. Murder
  2. Voluntary manslaughter
  3. Involuntary manslaughter
  4. Degrees of murder
  5. Felony murder
157
Q

MURDER
definition @ common law

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

= unlawful killing of a human being with MALICE AFORETHOUGHT

158
Q

MURDER
4 distinct ways to prove malice aforethought

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A
  1. intent to kill (includes “mercy” killings)
    (NOTE = in some states, if the defendant intentionally uses a deadly weapon on the victim, the jury is permitted to infer “intent to kill”)
  2. intent to inflict great bodily injury that could easily lead to death
    (ex = shoot in the shoulder, strike in head with baseball bat or cement block)
  3. reckless indifference or extreme recklessness
    (ex = shooting in a crowded room or shooting in the direction of people)
  4. intent to commit a common law felony (felony-murder)
159
Q

MURDER
timing rule at common law

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

A YEAR AND A DAY RULE

= D’s act must cause victim’s death within one year and a day at common law

160
Q

MURDER
2 takeaways on causation

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

The hastening of one’s death may be murder

D is liable for the natural and probable consequences of his acts, even if not anticipated AKA D is liable even if not aware of victim’s preexisting condition

161
Q

VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
definition

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

= Intentional or reckless killing as a result of adequate provocation

(AKA common law murder plus provocation)

162
Q

VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
4 elements for adequate provocation

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

adequate provocation exists when there is

  1. sudden and intense passion for an average person (objective)
  2. provocation in fact (subjective)
  3. no “cooling off” time for an average person (objective)
  4. no “cooling off” time for the defendant (subjective)

NOTE

  • If D killed another intentionally or recklessly and any of these 4 elements is absent, the defendant is guilty of murder
  • if all 4 of the elements of voluntary manslaughter are present, D is not innocent, just guilty of voluntary manslaughter instead of murder
163
Q

VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
3 most likely UBE fact patterns

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

For UBE purposes, voluntary manslaughter is probably limited to the following fact patterns

  1. defendant finds his or her spouse in bed with another person,
  2. defendant is involved in mutual combat, or
  3. defendant responds to an assault/battery with too much force (aka more force than necessary for self-defense)
164
Q

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
3 types of involuntary manslaughter

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A
  1. Ordinary recklessness (majority)
  2. Criminal negligence (minority)
  3. Unlawful act manslaughter
165
Q

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
ordinary recklessness manslaughter

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

(majority)

a person may be convicted of involuntary manslaughter if he acts recklessly by consciously disregarding a high risk of death or serious bodily injury

166
Q

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
criminal (gross) negligence manslaughter

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

(minority)

a person may be convicted of involuntary manslaughter if a reasonable person would have been aware that her conduct created an unreasonable and high risk of death or serious bodily injury

167
Q

INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
unlawful act manslaughter

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

(i.e., misdemeanor-manslaughter)

a person may be convicted of involuntary manslaughter for a killing that occurs during the course of a serious misdemeanor or a felony not included on the list of felonies for felony-murder

a majority of states do not have unlawful-act manslaughter statutes

168
Q

DEGREES OF MURDER
definition in modern law

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

Under MODERN LAW in MOST states, all murders are presumed to be second degree murder UNLESS the prosecution proves one of the following (in which case the accused is guilty of first degree murder):

  1. deliberate and premeditated killing: brief reflection on idea of killing (ex = lying in wait or ambush)
  2. first degree felony-murder: statutorily defined as such (generally burglary, arson, robbery, rape, kidnapping, felonious escape)
  3. killings performed in certain ways, as enumerated by statute (ex = by bomb, poison, torture)
169
Q

DEGREES OF MURDER
definition @ common law

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

TRICK.

common law didn’t divide murder into degrees

170
Q

DEGREES OF MURDER
definition under MPC

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

TRICK.

MPC doesn’t divide murder into degrees

171
Q

FELONY MURDER
definition

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

= a killing committed
1. during the COURSE of a common law felony OR
2. during an ATTEMPT to commit a common law felony
EVEN IF the killing is accidental

172
Q

FELONY MURDER
6 common law felonies

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A
  1. Burglary
  2. Arson
  3. Robbery
  4. Rape
  5. Mayhem
  6. Kidnapping
173
Q

FELONY MURDER
criminal intent required for felony murder

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

TRICK

The criminal intent is implied from intent to commit the underlying felony

174
Q

FELONY MURDER
3 requirements

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A
  1. The underlying felony must be INDEPENDENT of the killing
  2. The death must be the FORESEEABLE result of the commission of a felony
  3. The death must have been caused DURING the commission or attempted commission of the felony OR the immediate flight from the felony
175
Q

FELONY MURDER
death penalty for felony murder

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

a person may receive the death penalty for felony-murder only if he played a substantial role in the felony AND the killing

(EX = the getaway driver may be convicted of felony-murder but probably cannot be sentenced to death)

176
Q

FELONY MURDER
requirement of independent of the killing

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A 
there is no felony-murder for 
1. battery
2. assault
3. child abuse
4. manslaughter 
because these crimes are often precursors to murder
177
Q

FELONY MURDER
requirement of immediate flight

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

before the felon reaches a place of safety, such as his home or a hide-out

178
Q

FELONY MURDER
liability for deaths during commission of felony

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

liability for death of co-felon

  1. generally, D NOT liable for death of CO-FELONG caused by RESISTANCE from victim or police (b/c killing by police/victim is justifiable)
  2. BUT D is probably liable for FELONY-MURDER if D HIMSELF kills (accidentally or intentionally) CO-FELONG during commission of the felony

liability if police/victim accidentally kill police/victim/bystander

  1. MAJORITY = agency theory aka D NOT liable
  2. MINORITY = proximate cause aka D probably LIABLE
179
Q

FELONY MURDER
defense to underlying felony

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

If the defendant has a defense to the underlying felony, then she can use the same defense for felony-murder

180
Q

FELONY MURDER
merger

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

Under the doctrine of merger, the defendant may not be convicted of both felony-murder and the underlying felony (e.g., robbery), unless there are multiple victims

181
Q

FELONY MURDER
MPC view

[homicide // offenses against the person]

A

MPC does not recognize felony-murder, but it does establish a “rebuttable presumption” of recklessness for killings that occur during the commission of a robbery, rape, arson, burglary, kidnapping, or felonious escape

182
Q

KIDNAPPING
definition

[offenses against the person]

A

= The confinement of a person involving EITHER

  1. some movement of the victim against the victim’s will or
  2. restraint of the victim in a secret place
183
Q

KIDNAPPING
secret location element

[offenses against the person]

A

= location where the victim is unlikely to be found or a location outside of public view

184
Q

KIDNAPPING
movement of the victim element

[offenses against the person]

A

Traditional view = any movement of victim against her will is sufficient

majority view (and MPC) = Substantial movement is required (minor movement, like from room to room, incidental to another crime is insufficient)

185
Q

KIDNAPPING
consent of victim

[offenses against the person]

A

If the victim is competent to consent and does so, this may negate an element of the crime

Minors and mental incompetents may NOT consent

186
Q

FALSE IMPRISONMENT
definition

[offenses against the person]

A

= the unlawful confinement of a person without his or her consent

187
Q

FALSE IMPRISONMENT
3 takeaways

[offenses against the person]

A
  1. Nearly identical to the tort of the same name
  2. It is a general intent crime
  3. False imprisonment is a lesser included offense of kidnapping
188
Q

THE BASICS
7 crimes

[property offenses]

A
  1. Larceny
  2. Embezzlement
  3. False pretenses
  4. Robbery
  5. Extortion
  6. Receiving stolen property
  7. Forgery
189
Q

LARCENY
4 elements

[property offenses]

A
  1. An unlawful
  2. taking and carrying away (for even a slight distance and for a short period)
  3. of the personal property (not intangible or real property or services)
  4. of another
190
Q

LARCENY
larceny by trick

[property offenses]

A

If the victim consents to the defendant taking custody or possession of her property because of a misrepresentation made by the defendant, this is “larceny by trick”

191
Q

LARCENY
Taking definition

[property offenses]

A
  • The taking must be by trespass (AKA without consent or consent obtained by fraud)
  • If a person obtains possession of property with permission (e.g., borrows it with the intent to return) and later decides to retain it permanently, this is not larceny
  • BUT by contrast, if a person obtains property without permission (borrows it without permission) and then decides to retain it permanently, this is larceny by “continued trespass”
192
Q

LARCENY
Mental state required

[property offenses]

A
  • Larceny is a specific intent crime = D must have the intent to steal (permanently deprive the owner)
  • Mistake of ownership negates the mental state
  • Taking a car for a joyride with the intent to return is not larceny
    (also fun fact: the crime of joyriding is a lesser included offense of larceny)
193
Q

LARCENY
Larceny of mislaid/lost property

[property offenses]

A

One who finds lost or mislaid property is guilty of larceny if

  1. he intends to keep it at the time he finds it and
  2. he knows who owns the property or is reasonably able to discover the owner’s identity
194
Q

EMBEZZLEMENT
3 elements

[property offenses]

A
  1. Misappropriation of property
  2. Of another
  3. Held by D in lawful trust

NOTE = misappropriation must be by means INCONSISTENT W/ TERMS of the trust (aka includes any unauthorized use of the property, like donating it to charity or investing it in stocks)

195
Q

EMBEZZLEMENT
Distinction from larceny

[property offenses]

A

EMBEZZLEMENT occurs when the defendant MISAPPROPRIATES an item ALREADY IN HIS lawful possession (ex = trustee, bailee)
v.
LARCENY occurs when the defendant STEALS an item from the possession of ANOTHER

196
Q

EMBEZZLEMENT
2 rules for employee misappropriation

[property offenses]

A

If an employee misappropriates EMPLOYER’s property, use the following rules

  1. Low-level employees generally have only “custody” of their employer’s property and thus are guilty of larceny
  2. Management-level employees are generally guilty of embezzlement
197
Q

EMBEZZLEMENT
Intent required

[property offenses]

A
  • Embezzlement is a specific intent crime = D must act with the intent to defraud
  • If AT THE TIME OF MISAPPROPRIATION, D intends to RESTORE THE EXACT SAME ITEM of property, there is no embezzlement
    (BUT this rule does not apply if the property misappropriated is money)
198
Q

FALSE PRETENSES
5 elements

[property offenses]

A
  1. obtaining TITLE
  2. to property of ANOTHER
  3. by intentional or knowing
  4. FALSE statement
  5. EITHER
    - common law = of PAST or EXISTING fact
    OR
    - MPC = any false statement suffices, even false promise to perform in future
199
Q

FALSE PRETENSES
Intent required

[property offenses]

A

False pretenses is a specific intent crime

= D must act with the intent to defraud

200
Q

FALSE PRETENSES
Test to determine false pretenses or larceny by trick

[property offenses]

A

Ask: what did the victim intend to convey to the perpetrator?

  • If it was title (aka ownership) = false pretenses
  • If it was possession = larceny by trick
201
Q

ROBBERY
5 elements

[property offenses]

A
  1. The TAKING
  2. Of PERSONAL PROPERTY
  3. Of ANOTHER
  4. From the PERSON or in her PRESENCE
  5. By FORCE or INTIMIDATION
202
Q

ROBBERY
Force required

[property offenses]

A

Nearly any force will suffice

EXAMPLES

  • purse-snatching = good
  • clean pickpocketing = no good
203
Q

ROBBERY
3 takeaways

[property offenses]

A
  • The force or threats may be to gain possession of the property or to retain possession immediately after the theft (ex = using force to escape)
  • Robbery is a specific intent crime AKA D must act with the intent to steal
  • Robbery = larceny + either assault or battery
    (and the larceny, assault, and/or battery merge into the robbery)
204
Q

EXTORTION
4 elements

[property offenses]

A
  1. Acquiring property
  2. of another
  3. by means of certain ORAL or WRITTEN
  4. THREATS

NOTE = if the accused uses immediate threats of harm, this is robbery

205
Q

EXTORTION
Intent required

[property offenses]

A

Extortion is probably a specific intent crime at common law

206
Q

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY
5 elements

[property offenses]

A
  1. Receiving possession and control
  2. of personal property
  3. KNOWN (or strongly believed)
  4. to have been stolen
  5. by another person
207
Q

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY
Knowledge that property was stolen

[property offenses]

A

D’s “knowledge” that the property was stolen may be inferred from circumstantial evidence
(such as proof that the property was acquired from a person of questionable character or that the accused paid a disproportionately low price for the property)

208
Q

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY
Intent required

[property offenses]

A

Receiving Stolen Property is a specific intent crime = D must act with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property

209
Q

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY
What if the police get the stolen property and then do a sting op?

[property offenses]

A

If the police obtain possession of the property and then deliver it to the accused, the accused is not guilty of receiving stolen property (b/c it is no longer stolen)
BUT is guilty of ATTEMPTED receipt of stolen property if he thought he was buying stolen property.

210
Q

FORGERY
3 elements

[property offenses]

A
  1. MAKING or ALTERING
  2. a FALSE WRITING
  3. with the SPECIFIC intent to defraud
211
Q

FORGERY
legal efficacy requirement

[property offenses]

A

the writing must represent a document that has AFFECTS THE LEGAL RELATIONS BTWN THE PARTIES

examples = promissory note, check, will, deed, contract, loan application, or bank account application

Bar Refresher (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions