Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Criminal Law > Intro to Criminal Law > Flashcards

Intro to Criminal Law Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

5 Mental States of Culpability

A 
Purpose
Knowing
Reckless
Negligent
Strict Liability
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

purposeful

A

an actor has the conscious object to cause a result

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

knowing

A

an actor is aware of a practically certain result or high probability result

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

reckless

A

an actor is aware of a substantial risk but consciously disregards said risk

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

negligent

A

a reasonable person should have known of a substantial risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

strict liability

A

liability w/o regard to mental state

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

three charges for homicide

A

murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide

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

murder

A

actor is purposeful or knowing

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

manslaughter

A

actor is reckless

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

negligent homicide

A

actor is negligent

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

standard for negligence

A

objectively, what would a reasonable person have known in the situation

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

role of mistake

A

D may argue that mistake negates higher mental states, but admits to lower mental state

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

faultless mistake

A

actor did not commit conduct negligently, recklessly, knowingly, or purposely

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

negligent mistake

A

mistake negates recklessly, knowingly, and purposely

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

reckless mistake

A

mistake negates knowingly and purposely

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

standard evaluation of mistake

A

objective reasonableness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

babies & ditches

A

G is purposeful b/c he sought result to harm A;
all other mental states for G do not matter if purpose is blameworthy;
C is negligent b/c she was not aware of substantial risk (ditch hidden in grass)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

too young / too immature

A

L is strict liability b/c statutory rape is considered a strict liability crime;
strict liability is liability w/o regard to culpable mental state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

a vegan death

A

parents are negligent b/c not aware of substantial risk, but parents should have been more aware of risk to child

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Thomas Fungwe

A

purposeful? no b/c did not plan on killing child;
knowing? no b/c TF did not know child was in car at time of arriving to work;
reckless? perhaps b/c TF was aware that child was in car at some point during ride b/c he placed the child in the car;
negligent? perhaps b/c a reasonable person would have known to drop off small child at daycare

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

homicide aggravator

A

homicide that may be negligent homicide, manslaughter, or an unintentional killing, but we upgrade the offense to murder b/c of the presence of an aggravator

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

what kind of argument is aggravation?

A

P b/c attempting to increase grade or seriousness of offense

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

what are the aggravation doctrines?

A

Extreme Indifference to value of a human life (MPC);
Depraved Heart (Common Law);
Felony Murder Rule

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Extreme Indifference to value of a human life

A

homicide committed under circumstances manifesting extreme recklessness;
suggests either a high level of recklessness (approx. 70%) or an actor repeatedly ignored a risk (approx. 20%);
echoes a knowingly mental state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

depraved heart

A

aka abandoned and malignant heart;
focuses on implied cruelty or malice rather than level of risk or disregard;
echoes a purposeful mental state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

3 applications to the FMR

A

Traditional, Limited, MPC

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

traditional FMR

A

unintentional death occurs during commission of (or attempt to commit) any felony constitutes a murder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

what issues w/ traditional FMR?

A

no req that D played significant role in killing;

proliferation of non-violent felonies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

limited FMR

A

limited to enumerated inherently dangerous felonies;

solves problem of traditional rule w/ exclusion of non-violent felonies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

what are considered to be dangerous felonies?

A

robbery, rape, arson, burglary, kidnapping

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

issue w/ limited FMR

A

still does not solve problem of D not involved in felony

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

MPC FMR

A

creates a rebuttable presumption of extreme indifference;

only includes specific serious felonies including robbery, rape, arson, burglary, kidnapping, felonious escape

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

homicide mitigator

A

decrease of a grade / seriousness of offense by one step (or more) if homicide committed w/ presence of mitigator

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

what kind of argument is mitigation?

A

D b/c attempting to decrease grade or seriousness of offense

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

two approaches to homicide mitigator

A

heat of passion and EM / ED

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

heat of passion (Common Law)

A

key word is provocation;

must be intense, sudden, and justified anger cause by provocateur

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

three requirements to heat of passion

A

objective reasonableness test;
no cool off allowed;
victim limited to provocateur

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

objective reasonableness test

A

no consideration of unique circumstances;

embodies social phenomenon depending on community homicide occurs

39
Q

Extreme mental/emotional disturbance (MPC)

A

subjective reasonableness test;
no time limit;
victim can be anyone

40
Q

subjective reasonableness test

A

from view point of actor’s situation

41
Q

But for cause

A

set the series of events in motion ending in the result;

w/o the cause, the result would not have happend

42
Q

Three factors of Proximate Cause

A

(1) passage of time
(2) intervening cause
(3) foreseeability/culpability

43
Q

Intervening Causes for Proximate Cause

A

accident –> okay argument for D
other actor –> better argument for D
other bad actor –> best argument for D

44
Q

in intervening cause, what does another bad actor indicate?

A

possible superseding cause = criminal actor

45
Q

MPC Proximate Cause

A

result not too remote or accidental to have a just bearing on actor’s liability

46
Q

Some states Proximate Cause

A

… and the result not too dependent on another’s volitional act

47
Q

another’s volitional act in Proximate Cause

A

presence of other bad actor means no proximate cause

48
Q

mental states req for attempt liability

A

conduct = purposeful
result = purposeful / knowing
attendant circumstances = reckless

49
Q

conduct requirement for attempt liability

A

some states = proximity test

MPC = a substantial step

50
Q

factors for some states’ proximity test

A

closeness = temporal or physical
dangerousness = weapons, vics, targets
“no turning back” = commitment

51
Q

a substantial step MPC

A

a significant act strongly corroborative of actor’s purpose;

more than thinking or mere prep

52
Q

7 elements that strongly corroborates MPC actor’s purpose

A

(1) lying in wait
(2) enticing victim
(3) reconnoitering
(4) unlawful entry
(5) possession of designed materials / materials in proximity w/ no lawful purpose
(6) soliciting
(7) aiding and/or assisting

53
Q

defense of renunciation

A

abandoned effort or prevent the crime;

a complete and voluntary renunciation of criminal purpose

54
Q

P argument for renunciation

A

calculated decision to avoid detection, apprehension, or failure;
calculated decision to postpone

55
Q

conspiracy

A

an agreement b/w two or more actors to commit, attempt, or solicit a crime

56
Q

three requirements for conspiracy

A

(1) mental state
(2) agreement
(3) overt act in furtherance of conspiracy

57
Q

mental state requirements for conspiracy

A

purpose for conduct/result

58
Q

agreement requirements for conspiracy

A

b/w two or more actors to commit, attempt, or solicit a crime;
MPC = unilateral or bilateral
some state = bilateral only

59
Q

overt act requirements for conspiracy

A

beyond the agreement;
MPC = not req’d for serious offenses
some states = req’d for ALL offenses

60
Q

renunciation defense for conspiracy

A

complete and voluntary attempt to prevent/thwart success of conspiracy;
higher standard than attempt

61
Q

direction for P in intoxication crime

A

do not focus on intoxication of D;

instead, focus on the most culpable conduct, ESPECIALLY if culpable BEFORE intoxication

62
Q

two types of intoxication

A

involuntary and voluntary

63
Q

when is intox defense allowed?

A

only defensible if actor is so intox’d that he/she is not able to appreciate their criminality or conform their conduct

64
Q

invol intox

A

strongest argument for D b/c, if successful, it negates the mental state for D

65
Q

types of invol intox

A

(1) not knowingly consumed
(2) no knowledge of intox’ing effects (or ought to know)
(3) medical advice w/o knowledge of intox’ing effect
(4) unanticipated level of intox; unforeseeable exaggerated response to known intox, like allergic reaction
(5) other circumstances like duress/necessity/etc.

66
Q

vol intox

A

not ideal for D, but it is better than the alternative;

better argument for P b/c argument not in some states

67
Q

MPC vol intox

A

negates the higher mental state but imputes recklessness

68
Q

three requirements for complicity

A

conduct, mental state for assistance, and mental state for underlying crime

69
Q

complicity MPC conduct

A

(1) promoting or facilitating
(2) aiding/encouraging
(3) attempting to aid
(4) agreeing to aid
(5) soliciting
(6) failing to prevent if under legal duty

70
Q

complicity some states conduct

A

some states don’t allow attempting to aid

71
Q

complicity conduct if agreement is the conduct

A

same split on unilateral/bilateral

72
Q

complicity conduct if attempt is the conduct

A

same conduct requirements (substantial step/proximity)

73
Q

complicity MPC mental state for assistance

A

purpose

74
Q

complicity some states mental state for assistance

A

purpose

75
Q

complicity MPC mental state for underlying crime

A

conduct crime = purpose

result crime = purpose, knowing, reckless, negligent (homicide = accomplice to murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide)

76
Q

complicity some states mental state for underlying crime

A

purpose for conduct or result crime

77
Q

any limits on FMR and Complicity

A

some states require prosecution prove that accomplice was armed, participated in killing, could foresee death

78
Q

innocent instrumentality

A

liability if actor purposely causes an innocent person to commit offense

79
Q

act requirement (defense argument)

A
  • at a minimum, must include voluntary muscular movement

- mere silence insufficient, unless circumstances imply inference of more (crime boss)

80
Q

involuntary actions

A
  • reflex, convulsion, seizure (hiccups)
  • movement during unconsciousness or sleep (sleepwalking)
  • conduct during hypnosis not generally accepted as involuntary
81
Q

omission (prosecution argument)

A
  • exception to the act requirement

- liability only if actor under duty and capable of performing

82
Q

sources of duty

A
  • statute
  • special status (parent, host, landowner)
  • voluntary assumption of care and seclusion
  • contractual duty
83
Q

MPC belief element of necessity defense

A

actor believes conduct necessary to avoid harm to actor or another

84
Q

Some States belief element of necessity defense

A

objective necessity

85
Q

MPC timing element of necessity defense

A

action immediately necessary

86
Q

Some States timing element of necessity defense

A

imminent threat

87
Q

conduct element of necessity defense

A
  • conduct actually averts the threat, or

- no lawful/less harmful means available

88
Q

proportionality element of necessity defense

A

objective reasonableness = offense charged inflicts less harm than evil avoided

89
Q

MPC Deadly Force in necessity defense

A

defense only to a lesser crime than the harm/evil avoided

90
Q

Some States Deadly Force in necessity defense

A

necessity not a defense to use of deadly force/homicide

91
Q

governmental preemption

A

no necessity defense if issue resolved by legal system OR more specific defense available (self-defense)

92
Q

MPC necessity defense limitations

A
  • actor creates situation or appraises necessity recklessly or negligently
  • liability for charge of reckless or negligent offense
93
Q

Some States necessity defense limitations

A

no necessity defense if actor contributed to bringing about threatened harm

Criminal Law (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions