General Principles Flashcards
BURDEN OF PROOF
THE GOVERNMENT MUST PROVE EACH ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. FOR MOST DEFENSES TO THE CRIMINAL CHARGE, THE STATE CAN REQUIRE A DEFENDANT TO ESTABLISH THE DEFENSE BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE.
NOTES:
Proof must be with admissible evidence
Elements are anything in the definition of the crime
Jury determines “beyond a reasonable doubt”
Affirmative defenses (entrapment, necessity, mental illness, self-defense, etc.) may at the state’s discretion, require defendant to prove by preponderance of the evidence (more likely that not).
UNLAWFUL ACT
BEFORE CRIMINAL LIABILITY CAN ATTACH, THERE MUST BE AN UNLAWFUL ACT COMMITTED BY THE DEFENDANT. AN OMISSION OF A FAILURE TO ACT WILL NOT GIVE RISE TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY UNLESS A CRIMINAL STATUTE REQUIRES ACTION OR THE DEFENDANT IS UNDER A LEGAL DUTY TO ACT.
NOTES:
Some laws simply prohibit results, and any act producing a result wiwoiuld satisify the requirement of an unlawful act.
Voluntary act - no criminal liability for non-voluntary actions (while having a seizure, while unconscious, acts forced by another)
Omissions
Statute requiring action: some crimes are omission by nature (tax returns)
Legal duty to act (4 situations)
Close personal relationship between Defendant and the person about to suffer harm
Defendent under contract to prevent harm
Civil statute requiring lending assistance
Defendant starts to give aid
CULPABLE MENTAL STATE
BEFORE CRIMINALITY CAN ATTACH PRACTICALLY ALL CRIMES REQUIRE AN UNLAWFUL STATE OF MIND ON THE PART OF THE ACTOR.
NOTES:
Culpable mental state = mens rea, guilty state of mind, or criminal intent
The culpable mental state is set out in the definition of the crime (Intentionally, recklessly, maliciously, etc.)
Specific Intent: Requires that the actor has an actual mental state of intent to do the act (ENGAGE IN THE BEHAVIOR) or cause the harm prohibited by the statute’s definition. Common law specific intent crimes: burglary, robbery, larseny, assault, attemp, and conspiracy.
Malice: can be met by proving extreme recklessness. Also known as depraved indifference to the consequences of the act. This state of mind can be proven by proving specific intent. Malice doesn’t have to correspond with “mean spirit” or “ill will” towards the victim (although that can ALSO be there). Common law malice crimes: murder and arson.
Recklessness: Extreme deviation from normal behavior by the actor. More than a lack of reasonable care. Common law reckless crimes: manslaughter, rape, and battery.
Negligence: Commonlaw negligence does not meet culpable mind state. Some statutory crimes include negligence as the mind state.
Strict Liability: Requires NO mind state. Statute does not include a mindframe, and the court concludes that the legislature intended to forgo the mental state requirement.
MPC: (see MPC Card for more in depth treatment) Purposely, Knowingly, Recklessly
COMMON LAW SPECIFIC INTENT CRIMES
LARCENY
BURGLARY
ROBBERY
ASSAULT
ATTEMPT
CONSPIRACY
MPC MENTAL STATE
Purposely: the actor’s conscious object was to engage in the conduct or cause the result prohibited by the crime’s definition.
Knowingly: If a crime prohibits conduct, a person acts knowingly if he is aware that his conduct is of that nature. If the crime prohibits causing a result, a person acts knowingly if he is aware or is practically certain his conduct will cause that result.
Recklessly: A person acts recklessly when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk. The behavior must represent a gross deviation from behavior that would be exhibited by a law-abiding person. If the statute does not set out a mental state, a culpable mental state of recklessly will be required for all elements of the crime.
CAUSE
IF THE DEFINITION OF THE CRIME REQUIRES BRINGING ABOUT A PARTICULAR RESULT, THE PROSECUTION MUST ESTABLISH THE ACTOR’S BEHAVIOR WAS THE CAUSE OF THE RESULT. TO ESTABLISH CAUSE THE PROSECUTION MUST SHOW THAT THE ACTOR’S BEHAVIOR WAS THE CAUSE IN FACT AND THE PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE RESULT.
NOTES:
Most crimes do not require bringing about a particular result. Criminal liability is based on the defendant’s conduct (speeding, burglary, possession, etc.). Therefore, most crimes do not require causation.
If a crime is based on the result (murder, manslaughter, battery) the state MUST establish the element of causation, both actual and proximate.
Cause in Fact (Actual Cause): But for the defendant’s conduct… OR defendant’s conduct was a SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR in causing the result.
But for: if the victim is already dead, shooting him is not a “but for” (actual) cause
Substantial Factor: Two defendants shoot simultaneously. Either shot would be deadly.
Proximate Cause: Harm resulting from the defendant’s act is the NATURAL AND PROBABLE RESULT OF THE DEFENDANT’S ACT.
No proximate cause if the harm is at the end of an absurd chain of events
No proximate cause if the harm was the direct result of some unforeseeable independent event beyond the control of the defendant.
MPC- Actual cause will establish proximate cause UNLESS the result is too remote or accidental.
ACCOMPLICE LIABILITY
A DEFENDANT CAN BE CONVICTED OF A CRIME UNDER THE THEORY OF ACCOMPLICE LIABILITY IF THE DEFENDANT, ACTING WITH A CULPABLE MENTAL STATE, AIDS, ABETS, ENCOURAGES, OR HELPS ANOTHER IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME.
NOTES:
Exam Tip: Accomplice = accessory, aider and abettor. If the “aider” helps in the commission of a crime WITH the necessary culpable mind state, they are guilty of the crime committed.
Help: something more than mere presence, from words of encouragement to handing someone a loaded gun.
Mental State: If the crime is specific intent, then the needs to have the specific intent mental state. Otherwise, it may just be the same mental state as the crime (jurisdiction specific)
Victim Exception: A person who is a member of the class the statute is protecting cannot be an accomplice to the crime.
MPE: Specific intent crimes require the aider to have the specific intent to have the crime committed. If the crime is bringing about a particular result, then the accomplice must have the mental state required by the definition of the crime.
