Elements of Crimes - Actus Reus Flashcards
Actus Reus
The actus reus of an offense consists of
- A volitional
- act (or failure to act)
- that causes
- social harm.
Actus Reus
Act
- An act is a bodily movement made by the individual
- It doesn’t count if a person causes another’s bodily movement.
- The term “act” has nothing to do with the results of the act.
- A person can do an act without thinking and it still can be volitional (ex. a habit, because you consciously form habits)
- Involuntary acts like muscle spasms or reflexes don’t count
Actus Reus
Volitional Act
MPC 2.01(1) & 1.12(1)
No person can be convicted of a crime unless he acted volitionally or failed to perform an act that he was physically able to perform
The prosecution must prove this beyond a reasonable doubt
Actus Reus
Exception
MPC 2.05(1)
The rules in 2.01 don’t apply to offenses that are violations, unless the count finds that applying 2.01 is consistant with effectively enforcing the law that defines the offense.
Violations
Offenses that have a maxium penalty of a fine or civil penalty.
Actus Reus
Social Harm
- A social harm is the denial, endangerment or destruction of an individual, group or state interest that society deems socially valuable.
- The definition of an offense will define the social harm
- A social harm may contain wrongful conduct or wrongful results, but it will always contain attendent circumstances.
Actus Reus
Social Harm Elements
Conduct Crimes
Conduct crimes are offenses do not have to result in harm for the accused to be convicted. Ex. drunk driving
Actus Reus
Social Harm Elements
Result Crimes
Result crimes are crimes in which the result matters but the conduct does not. Ex. murder
Actus Reus
Social Harm Elements
Attendant Circumstances
Attendent circumstances are elements found in the definition of a crime; they are factors or condictions that must exist at the time of the act. Ex. burglary - it must happen at night
Time-Framing
Looking back to the time of the crime and before the time to try to determine whether the actor was culpable.
MPC 1.13(5)
Conduct
An act or omission, or series of acts and omissions, and the accompanying state of mind.
Actus Reus
Act
People v. Wilbert Davis
People cannot be punished based on their status, but can be punished for actions they do because of their status. Ex. can’t punish people for being drug addicts but can punish them for possessing drugs
Status Offenses
Offenses that punish a person’s status. SCOTUS frowns on these.
Actus Reus
Crimes of Possessions
- Prohibit possessing contraband or criminal instrumentalities
- Requires that the defendant knowingly procured or received the item or failed to depose of it after becoming aware of its presence.
- These are incomplete crimes, meaning police can arrest people they suspect will commit a crime.
Actus Reus
Commission by Ommision
If a duty exists and the person is capable of the required action, not doing it can substitute for a voluntary act.
Examples of When There’s a Duty to Act
- Common Law
- Special status relationship - when one person is dependant on another
- Voluntary assumption of care in a manner that prevents others from rendering aid
- Creating a harm
- Contractal relationship
- Statute
MPC 1.13(1)
Statute
Includes the Constitution and any local law or ordinance
MPC 1.13(2)
Act or Action
Any voluntary or involuntary bodily movement
MPC 1.13(4)
Ommission
Failure to act
MPC 1.13(6)-(7)
Actor or Acted
Includes a person guilty of an omission or an omitted act
MPC 1.13(10)
Material Elements of an Offense
An element that does not exclusively relate to the jurisdiction, venue, or any matter that is not connected with
- The harm or evil the law seeks to prevent or
- A justification of or excuse for the conduct
MPC 1.13(9)
Element of an Offense
Conduct or attendent circumstances or a result of conduct that
- Is included in the conduct forbidden by the offense or
- Establishes the required kind of culpability or
- Negates an excuse for or justification for the conduct or
- Negates a statute of limitations defense or
- Establishes jurisdiction or venue
MPC 2.01(1)
Requirements for Guilt
A person is only guilty of a crime if his conduct includes a voluntary act or an omission to perform an act that he is physically able to perform.
MPC 2.01(2)
Non-Volutary Acts
- Volitional acts are all willed body movements
- Volitional acts do not include
- Reflexive acts or convulsions
- Movements while unconsious or
- Movement while asleep or
- Conduct during hypnosis
MPC 2.01(4)
Possession
Possession is an act if the possessor knowingly procured or received the thing possessed or was aware of his possession long enough to get rid of it
MPC 2.01(3)
Omission-Based Liability
Liability can be based fully on an ommision only when
- The law specifically says the omission is enough to prove the offense
- A duty to act is imposed by law
Constructive Possession
- You have possession over everything in your home because you exercise dominion and control over your home
- Drivers exercise dominion and control over everything in the car even if the car is borrowed
- Passangers are said to exercise dominion and control over the parts of the car they have access to
Causation
Causation requires both actual cause and proximate cause
Causation
Actual Cause
Cause-in-Fact
- The defendant’s conduct must be the actual cause of the social harm.
- Actual cause is proven by the but-for test - the social harm would not have occurred when it did in the manner it did in the absence of the defendant’s conduct.
Causation
Proximate Cause
Proximate cause is proven by the natural and probable consequences of an action
Causation
Proximate Cause
Intervening Cause
An intervening cause is an independant force that operates in producing the social harm, but which only comes into play after the defendant’s voluntary act has been committed or his omission has occurred
Causation
Proximate Cause
Superseding Cause
When intervening cause relieves the defendant of criminal responsibility, the law describes it as a superseding cause
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
De Minimis Contributation to Social Harm
If the conduct of the second actor was worse than the first actor’s conduct, the second actor will be the proximate cause because the responsibility of the first actor is inconsequential compared to the responsibility of the second actor
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
Foreseeability of the Intervening Cause
Many courts say that the linchpin of proximate cause is whether the intervening acts were reasonably foreseeable.
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
Foreseeability of the Intervening Cause
Responsive Intervening Cause
- A reponsive intervening cause is an act that occurs in reaction or response to the defendant’s prior wrongful conduct
- Generally, a responsive intervening cause does not relieve the initial wrongdoer of criminal responsibility unless the response was abnormal and unforeseeable
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
Foreseeability of the Intervening Cause
Coincidential Intervening Cause
- A coincidential intervening cause is a force that does not occur in response to the initial wrongdoer’s conduct
- The only relationship between the defendant’s conduct and the intervening cause is that the defendant placed the victim in a situation where the intervening cause could independently act upon him
- Under common law, a coincidental intervening cause relieves the original wrongdoing of criminal responsibility, unless the intervention was forseeable
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
The Defendant’s Mens Rea
(Intented Consequences Doctrine)
Trace the cause of the social harm backwards through other causes until reaching an intentional wrongdoer
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
Danerous Forces That Come to Rest
(Apparent Safety Doctrine)
If the dangerous situation passed into a point of safety, the defendant won’t be liable for harm that occurs after the point of safety
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
Free, Deliberate, Informed Human Intervention
A defendant is far more likely to be relieved of criminal responsibility if the intervention is caused by a free, deliberate, informed act rather than actions of a person whose conduct is not fully free.
Causation
Intervening Cause Factors
Omissions
An omission will rarely supersede an eariler operative wrongful act, even if the intervening actor had a duty to act
Intervening Causes
MPC 2.03
A defendant has acted with the requisite culpability when the actual result, including the way in which it occurred, was not too remote or accidental in its occurance to have a just bearing on the actor’s liability or on the gravity of his offense.
People v. DeCosta
- To be held criminally responsible, a defendant’s conduct must actually contribute to the result by setting in motion the events that resulted
- Liability will attach even if the defendant’s conduct is not the sole cause of the result if the actions were a sufficiently direct cause of that result
- More than an obscure or merely probable connection between the conduct and the result is required
- An act qualifies as a sufficiently direct cause when the ultimate harm should have been reasonably foreseen
