Introduction and essential elements Flashcards
Generally, state has jurisdiction over a crime if
Any act constituting an element of the offense was committed in the state
An act outside the state caused a result in the state
If multiple states have jurisdiction over the crime, can be subject to punishment in both states
Common law merger - felony and misdemeanor
At common law, if a person engaged in conduct constituting both a felony and a misdemeanor, they could be convicted only of the felony
The misdemeanor merged into the felony
Modern law merger
Generally, no merger of crimes
- so can be convicted of both
But a person who solicits another to commit a crime may not be convicted of both solicitation and the completed crime if does complete it
- solicitation merges into conspiracy
And a person who completes a crime after attempting it cannot be convicted of both the attempt and the completed crime
But conspiracy does not merge with the completed offense
- so can be charged of both conspiracy and the completed offense
MPC and inchoate crime
Under MPC, a defendant cannot be convicted of more than one inchoate crime - attempt, conspiracy, solicitation - when their conduct was designed to culminate in the commission of the same offense
Essential elements of a crime
A crime almost always requires proof of
- physical act, acts reus
- mental state, mens rea
- a concurrence of the act and mental state
May also require proof of a result and causation - act caused the harmful result
Physical act
Defendant must have either performed a voluntary physical act or failed to act under circumstances imposing a legal duty to act
Bodily movement
Bodily movements that do not qualify for criminal liability
Conduct that is not the product of the person’s own volition
A reflective or convulsive act
An act performed while unconscious or asleep
Omission as an act
The failure to act gives rise to liability only if
- there is a legal duty to act
- the defendant has knowledge of the facts giving rise to the duty to act, and
- it is reasonably possible to perform the duty
Legal duty to act can arise from one of five circumstances
Legal duty to act (5 circumstances)
A legal duty to act can arise from one of five circumstances
- by statute
- by contract
- the relationship between the parties
- the voluntary assumption of care by the defendant for the victim
- the defendant created the peril for the victim
Defendant created the peril and legal duty
If created the peril and did not act, actus reus satisfied
Generally no good samaritan law but if create peril. must attempt to do something
- doesn’t require that they put themself in danger, but must do something
Possession as an act
Defendant have control of the item for a long enough period to have an opportunity to terminate the possession
Can be constructive - doesn’t need to be proved when contraband in an area within the defendants communion and control
Specific intent
A crime may require not only the doing of an act, but also the doing of it with a specific intent or objective
Specific intent cannot be conclusively imputed from the mere doing of the act, but the manner in which the crime was committed may provide circumstantial evidence of intent
Allow for additional defenses not available for other types of crimes
- voluntary intoxication
- unreasonable mistake of fact
11 major specific intent crimes - students can always fake a laugh, even for ridiculous bar facts
Solicitation - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to have the person solicited commit the crime
Conspiracy - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to have the crime completed
Attempt - intent
Specific intent crime even if the underlying crime attempted is not
- common law murder requires the specific intent to kill
Intent to complete the crime
First degree premeditated murder - intent
Specific intent crime
Premeditated intent to kill
Larceny - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to permanently deprive the other of their interest in the property taken
Assault - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to commit a battery
Embezzlement - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to defraud
False pretenses - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to defraud
Robbery - intent
Specific intent crime
intent to permanently deprive the other of their interest in the property taken
Burglary - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to commit a felony in the dwelling
Forgery - intent
Specific intent crime
Intent to defraud
Malice
Common law murder and arson
Intent necessary for these malice crimes requires a reckless disregard of an obvious or high risk that the particular harmful result will occur
General intent
Awareness of factors constituting crime
- aware that they are acting in the proscribed way and that any required attendant circumstances exist
- does not have to be certain that all circumstances exist - aware of high likelihood that they will occur
General intent is the big catch-all
- if not malice or specific, general
- Just have to worry that everything other than the specific, specific intent crimes doesn’t get the 2 other defenses
Can infer the required general intent merely from the doing of the act
Strict liability offense
Not required to have awareness of all of the factors constituting the crime
Guilty from the mere fact that they committed the act
Strict liability if
- the crime is in the administrative, regulatory, or morality area, and - there are no adverbs like knowingly, willfully, or intentionally
MPC categories
Purposely
Knowingly
Recklessly
Negligently
Purposely
Subjective standard
Conscious object is to engage in certain conduct or cause a certain result
Knowingly
With respect to the nature of their conduct, aware that their conduct is of a particular nature or that certain circumstances exist
Aware of a high probability that they exist and deliberately avoid learning the truth
Result of conduct, know that their conduct will necessarily or very likely cause a particular result
Recklessly
Consciously disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk that circumstances exist or that a prohibited result will follow
Disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in that situation
Negligence
Criminal negligence
Only MPC with objective standard - very unreasonable risk
Fail to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk where such failure is a substantial deviation from the standard of care
Transferred intent
Almost always gets tested with first degree murder
Intend the harm that is actually caused but to a different victim or object
applies to homicide, battery and arson - not attempt
usually guilty of two crimes - completed crime against the actual victim and attempt against the intended victim
Concurrence of mental fault with physical act
Intent necessary for the crime at the time they committed the act and intent prompted the act
Ex: d driving to v’s house to kill him, lack necessary concurrence for murder if accidentally runs v over before reaching the house
Causation
Some crimes, like homicide, require result and causation
When a crime is defined to require conduct and a specified result, def’s conduct must be both cause in fact and proximate cause of specified result
