General Principles Flashcards

1
Q

What is the standard of proof for each element of a crime?

A

Each element must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

In order to be convicted of a crime, a must be?

A

Guilty of each element beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

When is the actus reus element met?

A
  1. An act that is voluntary

Or

  1. There is an omission to act and there is a legal duty to act.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the elements that must be proven in each crime?

A
  1. Actus Resu: act requirement.
  2. Mens Rea: mental state.
  3. Concurrence: Mens Rea drove the Actus Reus
  4. Actual cause
  5. Proximate Cause
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are examples of non-voluntary acts?

A

Acts while

  1. Sleepwalking
  2. Under Hypnosis

Or

  1. During an epileptic seizure.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Are habitual acts (conditioned reaction) voluntary acts?

A

Yes

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

Are acts performed under duress voluntary acts?

A

Yes

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

When are there legal duties to act where an omission would fulfill actus reus?

A

Statutory duties: a law enforcement officer

Legal duty by contract; a life guard

Status relationship: husband/wife; parent/child

Voluntary undertaking to rescue that is abandoned: telling others to stay back so you can rescue someone, and then abandoning the effort

Failing to help after creating the risk of peril: a hit and run.

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

What are the main categories of mens rea?

A
  1. Purposeful
  2. Knowledge
  3. Intentional
  4. Willful
  5. Recklessness
  6. Criminal Negligence

And

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

Define purposeful mens rea?

A

It is the person’s conscious objective to produce a result.

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

Define knowledge mens rea?

A

A person knows a course of action will almost certainly produce a specific result.

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

Define intent mens rea?

A

Acting with

  1. Purpose

or

  1. Knowledge.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the applicable mens rea for inchoate crimes?

A

Only purposeful mens rea.

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

Define willful mens rea?

A
  1. Actus Reus 2. Mens Rea3. Concurrence: Mens Rea drove the Actus Reus4. Actual cause5. Proximate Cause
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Define criminal negligence mens rea?

A

A person

  1. Creates an unjustifiable risk
  2. They are subjectively unaware of the risk

And

  1. A reasonable person would have been aware of the risk.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Differentiate

criminal negligence v. civil negligence

A

Criminal negligence is a gross deviation from the normal standard of care.

Civil negligence is only a deviation from the normal standard of care.

17
Q

What do specific intent crimes require?

A

Proof that ∆ intended to produce the specific result.

18
Q

What is type of crime requires the ∆ to act “with the intent to?

A

Specific intent crimes.

19
Q

What does general intent require?

A

∆ desired to do the prescribed act.

Includes: reckless and negligent acts.

20
Q

How can the specific intent element of a crime can be nullified?

A
  1. ∆’s honest but unreasonable mistake of fact

Or

  1. Voluntary intoxication.
21
Q

How can a general intent element of a crime can be nullified?

A

An honest and reasonable mistake of fact.

22
Q

What are the types of malice?

A
  1. Express malice

And

  1. Implied Malice.
23
Q

Essential mens rea element for murder?

24
Q

When can express malice in murder can be established?

A
  1. ∆’s purpose was to kill another purpose
  2. ∆ acted with knowledge that conduct would kill

Or

  1. ∆ acted with intent to inflict serious bodily injury
25
When can **implied malice** in murder be established?
1. ∆ caused a death as the result of extreme reckless or criminally negligent conduct And 2. ∆'s conduct manifested a wanton disregard for the value of human life.
26
**Implied malice** may be established in what types of **killings**?
1. Unintentional killings And 2. Felony murders
27
What is the mens rea in **strict liability** crimes?
There is none. Any act that brings about the prohibited effect results in guilt.
28
When is **mistake of fact** **never** a **defense** to a crime?
Strict liability crimes.
29
Unlawful killing + **Malice** =
**Murder**
30
When does **transferred intent** occur?
The ∆ intends to produce harm against one party but inadvertently harms another party. The intent transfers to the unintended victim and ∆ cannot use a defense that they harmed the wrong person.
31
What is the relationship between **mens rea and actus reus?**
In order to prove guilt, the prosecution must prove that the act that causes the criminal result was set in motion by the requisite criminal state of mind. There must be a concurrence between the act and the intention.
32
What does the **causation** of **element** of a crime require?
The ∆ must be the 1. Actual and 2. Proximate cause of the criminal result.
33
**∆ cannot** be **proximate cause** without also being?
The actual cause.
34
What are the **actual cause tests**?
**But for causation**: criminal result would not have occurred but for the ∆'s act **Substantial Factor**: when there are multiple causes or other parties responsible for the same criminal result, ∆ is the cause if ∆'s acts were a substantial factor in causing the criminal result. Or **Acceleration**: when ∆'s conduct speeds up the inevitable death of someone (even by a matter of seconds).
35
What is the **test** for **satisfying** the **proximate cause** element?
1. If the harm was a **foreseeable** consequence of ∆'s conduct, ∆ **is** the proximate cause 2. if the harm was an **unforeseeable** result of ∆'s conduct, ∆ is **not** the proximate cause.
36
**When** is **proximate** cause **analysis** required?
When an intervening event comes between ∆'s actual cause and the criminal result.
37
When will an **intervening** event **supercede** **∆'s** criminal responsibility?
If the intervening event is foreseeable, it does not supersede; if it is **unforeseeable**, it normally will supersede.
38
What type of **conduct** is: Foreseeable v. Unforeseeable?
Unforeseeable: gross negligence or reckless conduct of another party. Foreseeable: simple negligence of another or special sensitivities of the victim.
39
What is the **analysis** when determining if there is an **intervening cause**?
If it was **responsive** to ∆'s initial act: not superseding Or If the intervening cause **independent** of ∆'s act or a mere coincidence: **superseding**.