Culpability (Mens Rea)

Question 1

Types of Mens Rea

Answer 1

1. Purposely
   
   1. It was D’s purpose, desire, or conscious objective to cause the result or to engage in the specific conduct
   2. A person acts purposely with respect to attendant circumstances if he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist
2. Knowingly
   
   1. D has knowledge of a material fact if he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result or that such attendant circumstances exist
3. Recklessly
   
   1. A person acts recklessly if he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustified risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct
   2. D does not know that something will happen but is aware of the risk of the harm, and does it anyway
4. Negligence
   
   1. A person acts negligently if the actor should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct
   2. Would a reasonable person understand the risk?
   3. Objective standard, rather than subjective
5. Strict Liability
   
   1. Anything less than negligence
   2. Strict liability offenses usually do not contain a mens rea requirement

Question 2

Problems w/ Non-MPC Jx’s:

Vague mens rea terms (Regina v. Faulkner)

Answer 2

1. Mens rea = mental state
2. Difficult to define mens rea terms, therefore, difficult to figure out what a given statute means
3. Must look at arguments on both sides
   
   1. People don’t agree on the meanings

Question 3

Problems w/ Non-MPC Jx’s:

What “actus reus” elements do any “meas rea” elements modify?

Answer 3

1. Usually no right answer to this problem
2. D would argue that the mens rea term modifies what comes before it, and P would argue that it modifies what comes after it (United States v. Yermian)

Question 4

Problems w/ Non-MPC Jx’s:

How do the “mens rea” terms apply to the “actus reus” terms?

Answer 4

1. Mistake of fact vs. mistake of law

Question 5

Problems w/ Non-MPC Jx’s:

What if no mens rea term appears in the statute?

Answer 5

1. Courts will generally require some mens rea term, and lawyers on each side will make the best arguments they can based on considerations involving desert and deterrence
2. Where no mens rea will be assumed and the court will apply strict liability (Morissette v. United States)
   
   1. Public welfare offenses
      
      1. Such as narcotics claims
   2. Purely jurisdictional elements
      
      1. If you commit a murder on the border of CA, but you thought you were in AZ
   3. Grading elements
      
      1. Grand larceny vs. petty larceny
      2. If you steal somebody’s suitcase, and it turns out to have diamonds inside
   4. Age of victim in statutory rape cases (in some jurisdictions)
      
      1. If D thought the victim was 18, you would be strictly liable with respect to the age of the victim
3. Public welfare offenses vs. mala in se common law defenses
   
   1. Certain kinds of statutes would not have a mens rea requirement and courts will apply strict liability
   2. Common law crimes are more likely to require a mens rea

Question 6

Mistake of fact

Answer 6

1. D has made a mistake in fact as to what he needs to be aware of for the crime to be committed
2. Regina and Yermian are both “mistake of fact” problems
3. Does not necessarily mean that D will win, it only means he can present the defense to the jury

Question 7

Mistake of law

Answer 7

1. Ignorance that the sum of elements is a crime is not permitted
   
   1. D is not aware that the law exists or that his conduct is illegal
2. Ignorance as to the meaning of the elements of a statute is not allowed
   
   1. If your mistake is about the meaning or interpretation of the words, that would be a mistake of law
3. The general rule is that mistake of law is not a defense
   
   1. However, there are some exceptions

Question 8

Hypo: It is a crime to knowingly carry a pistol without a license

Answer 8

1. D is not from the state and has a pistol under the seat of his car
2. He did not know it was illegal to have a pistol without a license because he was not from the state, and this is not the law where he is from
   
   1. Mistake of law: not a defense
3. He did not know the pistol was under the seat
   
   1. Mistake of fact: valid defense
   2. The “knowingly” requirement would not be met

Question 9

Hypo: It is a crime to knowingly possess a controlled substance

Answer 9

1. D lives with other students and takes cold medicine, which is actually LSD
2. She did not know that LSD is a controlled substance
   
   1. Mistake of law: not a defense
   2. Under the law, she did not know the meaning of a controlled substance
3. She did not know it was LSD
   
   1. Mistake of fact: valid defense

Question 10

Hypo: Larceny is to knowingly take and carry away the property of another with the intent to knowingly deprive him/her of it permanently

Answer 10

1. D sees his boss leave his Rolex watch on the counter near a trashcan, and “accidentally” bumps the watch into the trash and goes back to get it from the dumpster later
2. He did not know what it means to “take and carry away,” which includes his conduct
   
   1. Mistake of law: not a defense
3. He didn’t know the watch bumped into the trashcan, and thus didn’t know he took and carried it away
   
   1. Mistake of fact: valid defense

Question 11

Exceptions (when mistake of law is a defense)

Weiss/Liparota Exception

Answer 11

Where the statute says something unusual to indicate a person must know he is breaking the law

1. People v. Weiss
   
   1. “To seize or kidnap another with intent to cause him without authority of law to be confined is a kidnapping”
   2. D kidnapped somebody who they thought was guilty, but it turned out to be the wrong guy
   3. Because the statute requires that they seize him “without the authority of law,” they are not liable
   4. The statute requires that D has the intent of breaking the law to be guilty
2. Liparota v. United States
   
   1. “Whoever knowingly possesses food stamps in any manner not authorized by the regulations is guilty of a crime”
   2. The language of the statute implies that you must know you are breaking the law to be guilty, so D is not liable

Question 12

Exceptions (when mistake of law is a defense)

Lambert Due Process exception

Answer 12

Lambert v. California

1. “Any convicted person who remains in Los Angeles for more than five days during any 30-day period or lives in Los Angeles without registering with the Chief of Police is guilty”
2. This law is a violation of Due Process under the 14th Amendment
   
   1. The defendant has to be put on notice
3. Unique situation because D didn’t do anything affirmative, they just failed to register
   
   1. Involves passive conduct – the failure to do something
4. This is a “mala in prohibitum” crime: bad because its prohibited
   
   1. “Mala in se” crime: bad in and of itself
5. Very narrow exception
   
   1. Never been applied by the courts because the situation is so rare
   2. Must involve conduct that is passive

Question 13

Exceptions (when mistake of law is a defense)

Mistake as to “other” law or “collateral” law

Answer 13

1. Will be treated like a mistake of fact
2. If somebody believes they are divorced but they are actually married
   
   1. This is a mistake of law in family law, not criminal law

Question 14

Exceptions (when mistake of law is a defense)

Mistake based on an official declaration of the law

Answer 14

Where a person is acting on a reasonable official declaration so that they believe their conduct is okay, they can use that as a defense