Homicide Flashcards
Can intent to kill and/or do serious bodily injury be inferred from D’s conduct?
YES
The intent to do serious bodily injury, like the intent to kill, can be inferred from the defendant’s conduct in the light of the surrounding circumstances. The defendant’s choice of weapon, and the nature of the physical attack on the victim, are circumstances that can lead a reasonable jury to infer an intent to seriously injure the victim.
As to concurrence and crimes defined in terms of a particular result (like murder)….
the requisite concurrence is between mental state and act, NOT between mental state and result.
In other words, at the moment a defendant takes the act that brings about the result, the defendant must be actuated by the appropriate intent; it doesn’t matter whether the defendant still has that intent when the result finally occurs. (eg, planting a bomb and walking away, and bunch of other stuff happens, including D no longer wanting bomb to go off…as long as had the intent when had the act, then still guilty of consequences like murder)
Common Law Murder
CL Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought exists if there are NO facts reducing the killing to voluntary manslaughter or excusing it AND it was committed with one of the following states of mind:
Intent to kill;
Intent to inflict great bodily injury;
Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (“depraved heart murder”);
OR
Intent to commit a felony (under the felony murder rule).
Voluntary manslaughter is
a killing that would be murder BUT FOR the existence of
adequate provocation. Provocation is adequate only if:
It was a provocation that would arouse sudden and intense passion in the mind of an ordinary person, causing him to lose self-control (e.g., exposure to a threat of deadly force, finding a spouse in bed with another, being the victim of a serious battery, etc.);
AND
There was NOT sufficient time between the provocation and the killing for passions of a reasonable person to cool off.
Involuntary manslaughter is
an unintentional killing committed:
With criminal negligence;
Criminal negligence is grossly negligent action (or inaction when there is a duty to act) that puts another person at a significant risk of serious bodily harm or death.
OR
During an unlawful act, which may occur in one of two ways:
Under the misdemeanor-manslaughter rule, which is a killing committed in the commission of a misdemeanor; OR
A killing committed in the commission of a felony that is not statutorily treated as 1st degree felony murder or 2nd degree murder.
Statutory Modification of CL Criminal Homicide: 1st and 2nd degree
In some jurisdictions, murder is divided into degrees by statute. Generally, a murder is 2nd degree murder UNLESS it falls under any of the following statutory aggravating circumstances, which make it 1st degree murder:
Premeditation. The murder was deliberate and premeditated. If the defendant made the decision to kill in a cool and dispassionate manner and actually reflected on the idea of killing, even if only for a very brief period (e.g., a few seconds), it is 1st degree murder.
Felony Murder. The murder falls under a 1st degree felony murder statute. In many states, a killing committed during the commission of an enumerated felony is felony murder and called 1st degree murder. The most commonly listed felonies in such statutes are burglary, arson, rape, robbery, and kidnapping (BARRK); however, other felonies that are inherently dangerous to human life are often included as well.
Heinous Murder. The murder is performed in a certain way (e.g., torture, mutilation, etc.). Some states make these types of killings 1st degree murder.
Felony Murder Rule
Any death caused in the commission of, or in an attempt to commit, a felony is murder. However there are several limitations to this rule:
The defendant must have committed or attempted to commit the underlying felony – a defense that negates an element of an underlying offense will also be a defense to felony murder;
The felony must be distinct from the killing itself (e.g., commission of a battery that causes a victim’s death does not qualify as an underlying felony because the battery is not distinct from the killing itself);
The death must have been a foreseeable result of the felony;
AND
The death must have been caused before the defendant’s “immediate flight” from when the felony ended (i.e., once the felon has reached a place of “temporary safety” – subsequent deaths are not felony murder).
Note: Where there is a close causal relationship between the underlying felony (or the attempt to escape from it) and the death, the requirement of a death ‘‘during the commission of’’ the felony is generally deemed satisfied, even if the death doesn’t come until after the felony-and-escape period is in some sense over. (eg, the D gagged and bound the victim, robbed his home, then after he fled and was apprehended, the V died by suffocation while trying to escape form gag and bonds)
Causation to be liable for homicide
To be liable for homicide, the defendant’s conduct must be both the cause-in-fact and the proximate cause of the victim’s death:
Cause-In-Fact. A defendant’s conduct is the cause-in-fact of the victim’s death if the death would not have occurred but for the defendant’s conduct.
Proximate Cause. A defendant’s conduct is the proximate cause of the victim’s death if the death is a natural and probable consequence of defendant’s conduct. Superseding events break the chain of proximate causation (i.e., intervening events that are NOT foreseeable generally shield the defendant).
NOTE: A third party’s negligent medical care and the victim’s refusal of medical treatment for religious reasons are both foreseeable risks – thus, the defendant remains liable.
Traditionally, for a defendant to be liable for homicide, the death of the victim must occur within one year and one day from infliction of the injury or wound. Most states that have reviewed this rule have abolished it.
Imperfect self-defense doctrine
the defendant will be liable for manslaughter instead of murder, when he intentionally kills another, if either: (1) the defendant was the aggressor in a fight (and therefore not entitled to a self defense claim), or (2) the defendant honestly but unreasonably believed deadly force was necessary.
