Homicide Crimes

Question 1

Homicide

Answer 1

The unlawful killing of one human being by another

Common law: did not divide murder into degrees

Modern: murder is divided into degrees

Question 2

Start of Life

Answer 2

“Born alive rule”: In common law, the start of life is when someone is born alive

Fetus is not a living person (common law)

Question 3

End of Life

Answer 3

Most states interpret death as brain death

Question 4

First Degree Murder

Answer 4

The killing of another with intent and malice aforethought. The killing must include premeditation and deliberation.

Question 5

Malice

Answer 5

If defendant intends to kill, he acts with express malice. If malice aforethought is shown in any other way, it is implied malice.

Question 6

Premeditation

Answer 6

Thinking about and considering the killing in advance

No amount of time required; could be very short (‘wink of an eye’ doctrine)

In Brown, the court defines premeditation as the process of simply thinking about a proposed killing before engaging in the homicidal conduct.

Question 7

Deliberation

Answer 7

Actor must have a “cool head” to be able to properly consider the choice to kill and the consequences

Cannot deliberate in the heat of passion

In Bingham, a man who strangled a woman while raping her was found to be guilty of second-degree and not first-degree murder, because although time had passed (premeditation) no evidence was presented that the ∆ deliberated with a cool head before the act.

Question 8

Second Degree Murder

Answer 8

The unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.

Intentional killing without premeditation or deliberation.

Question 9

Four Ways of Proving Malice (Common Law)

Answer 9

1. Intent to kill
2. Intent to inflict serious bodily injury
3. Depraved Heart Murder
4. Felony Murder Rule

Question 10

Depraved Heart Murder (Majority Rule)

Answer 10

Defendant acted with gross/extreme recklessness and an extreme indifference to human life

Acts with conscious disregard of a substantial and unjustifiable risk to human life

In Knoller, the ∆ had two pit bulls which had a known propensity to attack people, and the ∆ didn’t have the strength to control the. The dogs attacked and killed a neighbor, and the ∆ was liable under a depraved heart murder.

Question 11

Felony Murder Rule Definition

Answer 11

A person who kills during the commission or attempted commission of a qualifying felony

Question 12

Felony Murder Rule Mens Rea

Answer 12

No mens rea required as to the killing; only for the murder established using the mens rea for the underlying felony

Question 13

CA Felony Murder Rule

Answer 13

An actor committing a felony during which a death occurs is liable for murder only if:

1. The person was the actual killer
2. The person, with the intent to kill, aided, abetted, solicited, requested, or assisted the actual killer in first degree murder
3. The person was a major participant in the felony and acted with reckless indifference to human life
4. The victim is a peace officer who was killed while in the course of the peace officer’s duties, where the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the victim was a peace officer engaged in the performance of the peace officer’s duties

Question 14

Felony Muder (First Degree): Enumerated Felonies

Answer 14

Rape, robbery, arson, burglary, and kidnapping, but can also include drive-by shootings or other inherently dangerous crimes

Question 15

Felony Murder (Second Degree): Unenumerated Felonies

Answer 15

Need to analyze whether the felony is inherently dangerous

Question 16

Majority Rule for Analyzing whether the Unenumerated Felony is Inherently Dangerous

Answer 16

Analyze whether the felony is inherently dangerous in the abstract by looking at the elements of the offense, not based on the facts of the specific case you are analyzing.

Ask: every time somebody commits this felony, is it going to pose an unreasonable risk to human life?

People v. James: Mother cooking meth in a trailer house.

Question 17

Minority Rule for Analyzing whether the Unenumerated Felony is Inherently Dangerous

Answer 17

Analyze whether the felony is inherently dangerous based on the circumstances of the case

Question 18

Limitations on the Felony Murder Rule

Answer 18

1. The inherently dangerous felony
2. The “res gestae” requirement
3. The merger doctrine
4. The agency rule

Question 19

The Inherently Dangerous Felony

Answer 19

1. In the case of unenumerated felonies, malice can only be established through felony murder if the felony is inherently dangerous, meaning that the felony cannot be committed without the danger regardless of the specific facts of the case.
2. The underlying felony must be independent, and not merge with homicide. Crimes like assault with a deadly weapon merge with homicide, and cannot be used for an independent basis for a felony-murder charge

Question 20

The “res gestae” Requirement (Modern)

Answer 20

Any death occurring during the commission of a felony is not automatically attributed to a perpetrator. There must be a causal connection between the felony and the death. A death which occurs after the felony is committed, but before the actor reached a place of apparent safety while escaping the scene, falls within the “re gestae” of the crime.

Question 21

The Merger Doctrine

Answer 21

Felony murder cannot apply to merger felonies, like assault or assault with a deadly weapon

Question 22

The Agency Rule (Majority)

Answer 22

A person can only be held liable for a death committed by themselves or by a co-defendant during the commission of the felony – not for a killing perpetrated by a victim or other responder.

Question 23

Manslaughter (Common Law)

Answer 23

The unlawful killing of another human being without malice aforethought

Question 24

Voluntary Manslaughter (Heat of Passion)

Answer 24

An intentional and unjustified killing may constitute manslaughter if in response to adequate provocation

Question 25

Provocation

Answer 25

Reduces murder to voluntary manslaughter

Question 26

Doctrine of Provocation: Three Approaches

Answer 26

1. The Early Common Law (Categorical) Test
2. The Modern “Reasonable Man” Test
3. The MPC’s Extreme Mental or Emotional Disturbance Test

Question 27

The Early Common Law (Categorical) Test

Answer 27

Can claim provocation if and only if one killed in response to:

i. An aggravated assault or battery
ii. The observation of a serious crime against a close relative
iii. An illegal arrest
iv. Mutual combat, or
v. Catching one’s wife in the act of adultery

People v. Ambro: a man killed his wife during an argument when she told him that she has a new man, and he is not the father of her children. RULE: mere words are sufficient to cause serious provocation if they are the cumulation of a series of adverse events.

Question 28

The Modern “Reasonable Man” Test

Answer 28

Elements:

i. The defendant acted in a heat of passion
ii. The defendant was reasonably provoked into a heat of passion
iii. The defendant did not have sufficient time to cool off between the provocative act or event and the killing; and
iv. A reasonable person in the defendant’s shoes would not have had sufficient time to cool

People v. Barry: ∆ was provoked by his newly wed wife over two weeks when she traveled to Israel without him and found a lover. RULE: There is no specific type of provocation required, verbal provocation may be sufficient. Unclear standards, similar demographic characteristic? not characteristic re. temper, self-control, drunkenness, …

Question 29

The MPC’s Extreme Mental or Emotional Disturbance Test

Answer 29

i. A murder can be reduced to manslaughter when committed “under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse”
ii. “The reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor’s situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be”
iii. More subjective

State v. Dumlao: ∆, a paranoid and extremely jealous individual shot and killed his mother-in-law while he was trying to scare his brother-in-law. The appellate court, by using the MPC, held that a jury could find the ∆ was provoked.

Question 30

Provocation: Mere Words

Answer 30

Mere words are not enough to qualify as adequate provocation. The provocation must be such that it would “inflame the passion of a reasonable man”

Question 31

Gay Panic Defense

Answer 31

∆ argues they flew into an uncontrollable rage at the sight of a queer person (Larry King case)

Question 32

Involuntary Manslaughter

Answer 32

Unintentional homicide committed with recklessness or gross negligence

Brought about death of another human being through criminal negligence
- Gross negligence or simple recklessness

Question 33

Criminal Negligence (Involuntary Manslaughter)

Answer 33

A grossly negligent action that puts another person at a significant risk of serious bodily injury or death.

Question 34

Involuntary Manslaughter (Majority Rule)

Answer 34

Should have been aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk to human life

Question 35

When Can Second Degree Murder be Dropped?

Answer 35

Second degree murder can be dropped to voluntary manslaughter if there is no malice

Question 36

Three Ways to Increase Second Degree to First Degree

Answer 36

1. Premeditation and Deliberation
2. Enumerated felony under felony murder theory
3. Other statutory rules

Question 37

Homophobia in Manslaughter

Answer 37

This is a sexual advance defense could be used by a male or female who claims that he/she killed in reaction to the victim’s sexual advances.

Commonwealth v. Carr: ∆ killed 2 women while they were having lesbian sex. D argued that their sexual relations provoked him b/c of his past. The court held that this wasn’t adequate provocation. A reasonable person would have left.

Question 38

Felony Murder Rule: Foreseeability

Answer 38

The felony-murder doctrine is not limited to deaths which are foreseeable. Rather, a felon is held strictly liable for all killings committed by him or his accomplices in the course of the felony, as long as the homicide is the direct causal result of the felony.

1. In Stamp, a man who had a heart attack because he was scared by a robbery triggered the felony murder rule despite the fact that it was not foreseeable.
2. In King, the felony murder rule was not applied when an airplane crashed due to inclement weather and a pilot’s inexperience when ∆ was transporting drugs on it.

Question 39

Causation in Felony Murder

Answer 39

Majority: but for causation is all that’s required (like in Stamp)

But for the felony, would the person have died?

Minority: more than but for causation is required. The killing must be closely related to the felony in time, place, and causal connection. Death must be a consequence not a mere coincidence. (King v. Commonwealth)

Question 40

In a majority jurisdiction, if an underlying felony is assaultive in nature

Answer 40

You cannot proceed with a felony murder charge