Guilty Mind + Environ Crimes

Question 1

Balint facts

Answer 1

B found guilty for distributing medical opiate derivatives without right paperwork. Claimed didn’t know drugs covered under Narcotics Act

Question 2

Balint statute

Answer 2

unlawful for any person to sell, give away any of the aforesaid drugs except in pursuance of a written order

Question 3

Balint holding

Answer 3

B did not need to know he was violating the law

Question 4

Balint reasoning

Answer 4

(1) statute didn’t have mens rea so Court applied SL
(2) in pursuance of public policy, specific acts don’t require knowledge element
(3) if in the drug selling business should look up law and make sure you are complying

Question 5

Freed facts

Answer 5

F had unregistered hand grenades. Said no proof he knew unregistered

Question 6

Freed statute

Answer 6

Unlawful to possess a firearm not registered to him

Question 7

Freed holding

Answer 7

It is a general intent crime and therefore ignorance of the law no excuse

Question 8

Freed reasoning

Answer 8

(1) doesn’t matter if he didn’t know they were unregistered all that is relevant is that he intended to take possession of the hand grenades
(2) Regulatory measure to promote public welfare
(3) possessing dangerous object should put someone on notice that they might commit a crime due to an error
(4) mens rea required in specific intent crimes but not in general intent

Question 9

How is Freed different from Morissette

Answer 9

stealing common law crime NOT public welfare offense

Question 10

Problem with Freed

Answer 10

CA prohibits hand grenade regardless of registration so is forcing him to register forcing to self-incriminate violating the 5A?

Question 11

Morissette Factors for Public Welfare Offense

Answer 11

(1) seeks to protect public health, safety and welfare
(2) punish negligence/omissions
(3) addresses risk of injury vs. actual injury
(4) whether penalties big vs. small
(5) whether stigma attached to conviction
(6) whether law creates new crime or adopts CL crime

Question 12

Public welfare offense is a ____ so should still ___

Answer 12

narrow carveout, presume mens rea

Question 13

If law criminalizing something bad in itself, it probably ___

Answer 13

requires mens rea

Question 14

If law punishes omissions/negligence, it is likely a ___

Answer 14

strict liability crime

Question 15

If law addresses the risk of injury, probably a ___

Answer 15

strict liability

Question 16

If penalties are ___ more likely to be SL

Answer 16

small

Question 17

IMCC facts

Answer 17

IMCC transports acid around US but do not document it properly

Question 18

IMCC Statute

Answer 18

whoever knowingly violates a regulation for safe transportation can be imprisoned

Question 19

IMCC statute says each shipper offering for transportation any hazardous material shall ___

Answer 19

describe that article on the shipping paper

Question 20

IMCC holding

Answer 20

Can be convicted of violating this law without knowing it exists

Question 21

IMCC reasoning

Answer 21

Knowingly requires knowledge of circumstances leading to violating but NOT knowledge of law itself

Question 22

Why does IMCC not require knowledge of law itself

Answer 22

(1) if you know you left out the info good enough don’t need to know doing so is illegal
(2) knowingly shipped acids without documentation
(3) should be on notice of regulations for dangerous materials

Question 23

Staples facts

Answer 23

S owns semi automatic but it was modified it into an automatic weapon. No evidence he modified it himself, but he didn’t register it.

Question 24

Staples holding

Answer 24

Must presume mens rea requirement –> Govt must prove he knew the gun has the features that make registration necessary

Question 25

Staples reasoning

Answer 25

(1) fed criminal statutes require mens rea even when they don't explicitly state it (2) Otherwise if SL need to have clear congressional support (3) normally SL lower penalties but here 10 years (4) Having guns ordinary American activity so shouldn't have SL for seemingly innocent activity

Question 26

Staples criticism

Answer 26

Everyone knows regulations on rifles so could've argued person on notice

Question 27

Mens rea checklist 1

Answer 27

What are elements of the crime? Conduct or result crime? Attendant circumstances

Question 28

Mens rea checklist 2

Answer 28

Where is the ambiguity? What are the possible readings of the statute attaching mental state to each element? (Presume recklessness)

Question 29

Mens rea checklist 3

Answer 29

Did Cong. intend strict liability? (Apply Morissette factors)

Question 30

Mens rea checklist 4

Answer 30

Who and what does each reading criminalize? Does this reading criminalize innocent conduct/people? Keep readings that convict non-innocent

Question 31

Prosecution Friendly reading for knowingly

Answer 31

Moncini, Hamling

Question 32

Prosecution Friendly reading for no mens rea supplied

Answer 32

Dean, PNT

Question 33

Prosecution Friendly reading for mistake of law defense

Answer 33

Moncini

Question 34

Prosecution Friendly reading for willfully

Answer 34

Bryan

Question 35

Prosecution Friendly reading for public welfare offenses

Answer 35

Balint, Freed, IMCC

Question 36

Defendant-friendly reading for knowingly

Answer 36

X Citement, Liparota

Question 37

Defendant-friendly reading for no mens rea supplied

Answer 37

Elonis (subjective intent required)

Question 38

Defendant-friendly reading for mistake of law defense

Answer 38

Lambert, Liparota

Question 39

Defendant-friendly reading for willfully

Answer 39

Ratzlaf, Cheek

Question 40

Defendant-friendly reading for public welfare crimes

Answer 40

Staples

Question 41

Weitzenhoff facts

Answer 41

Ds pumped sludge directly into the ocean (in excess of permit allotment)

Question 42

Weitzenhoff statute

Answer 42

Felony to knowingly violate [CWA] or any permit condition

Question 43

Weitzenhoff holding

Answer 43

conviction affirmed --> as long as Ds knew they were polluting that was enough

Question 44

Weitzenhoff reasoning

Answer 44

(1) knowingly refers just to knowing they were doing the action (not they know CWA section violating) (2) dumping of sewage precisely type of activity that puts discharger on notice that his acts may pose a public danger

Question 45

Weitzenhoff dissent

Answer 45

Dilutes traditional requirement of criminal state of mind and reduces moral authority crim law Prison shouldn't be use to achieve social goals regardless of moral innocence

Question 46

Hanousek facts

Answer 46

H manager in a railroad company. A contractor working under him failed to properly protect the pipeline and oil discharged into the river. Charged with negligently discharging harmful quantity of oil into water under CWA

Question 47

Hanousek holding

Answer 47

A public welfare statute may subject a person to criminal liability for ordinary negligence (vs. criminal negligence) without violating due process

Question 48

Hanousek reasoning

Answer 48

(1) CWA doesn't define negligence so use ordinary meaning of negligence (2) public welfare offenses meant to protect public from harmful items and criminalize conduct that a reasonable person should know is subject to strict regulation

Question 49

Hanousek dissent

Answer 49

CWA shouldnt be PWO because large penalty (1-2 years prison, 5-50K) + opens up heightened criminal liability to a broad range of ordinary commercial activities

Question 50

Hong facts

Answer 50

Avion violated discharge permit by discharging untreated waste water directly into the sewer system. H charged as responsible corporate officer

Question 51

Hong statute

Answer 51

Any person who negligently violates pretreatment requirements (includes any responsible corporate officers)

Question 52

Hong holding

Answer 52

H was a responsible corporate officer

Question 53

Hong reasoning

Answer 53

doesn't need to have caused the violating through wrongful action, he caused it through substantially controlling corporate operations