Lecture 2 - Mental States, Mistake, Causation Flashcards
An act is criminal only if ___
it is committed with a culpable mental state
Is motive and mens rea the same ting?
No
Under common law, serious offences (murder) require that the convicted acted with ___
Malice
What are the 4 mental states as defined by the MPC?
- Acting purposely
- Acting knowingly
- Acting recklessly
- Acting negligently
What is the general common law definition for the mens rea of murder?
“killing performed with malice aforethought”
In the evolution of the court, what is the common law distinction between express and implied malice? Give examples
Express Malice: murder with a deliberate intent to bring about the victim’s death
Ex. Shooting someone in the head
Implied Malice: an indifference to a result that was brought about by a level of carelessness so severe that it demonstrated the accused’s malice
Ex. Death by a horrific and avoidable accident
Under the MPC what is the definition of ACTING PURPOSFULLY?
- If the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to to cause such a result, and;
- If the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he belies or hopes they exist
What is another way to articulate MPC acting purposefully?
That their action was the result of a LUCID DECISION
Under the MPC, what constitutes ACTING KNOWINGLY?
- If the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist, and;
- If the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result
What mental state can be equated to acting knowingly?
Wilfull blindness
In the MPC what defines Recklessness? Give an example
the accused’s awareness of the possibility that their behaviour will cause a prohibited result
Crimes of recklessness penalize people for their risk-taking behaviour
Ex. Involuntary manslaughter
According to the MPC, a reckless person___
consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk
In the MPC, what differentiates reckless and negligent conduct?
The risk is still the same, but while the reckless person is aware of the risk and disregards it, the negligent person is oblivious to the existence of the risk
Give an example of negligent conduct
A parent leaving their infant in a hot car
Alex takes a deep breath and shoots jimmy in the head. Alex has acted___
Purposefully
Devin enters into a crowded theatre and yells “fire!” causing a stampede. Deven has acted___
Knowingly
Johnny, driving a brand new Ferrari down the interstate, decided to open up the throttle, and fails to make a turn he sees up ahead. Johnny has acted ___
Recklessly
Jared is drunk after hosting a party, and passes out during his shift as a lifeguard. Jared has acted ___ and also has demonstrated a ___.
negligently, legal omission
What are the 2 types of recognized mistake?
Mistakes of Fact, Mistakes of Law
What is a mistake of Fact?
An issue that undermines proof of either the mens rea or actus resu
What is the MPC definition of a mistake of fact?
“a defence if and only if it negates the required mental element of the offence (purpose, knowledge, recklessness, negligence)”
Is ignorance of the law a mistake of law? Common law vs MPC?
Common Law: Ignorance is no defence.
MPC: If and only if knowledge of the law is an integral component of committing the crime. (Ex. tax evaders must be aware that they are committing evasion)
What will enable a knowing offender to claim a defence of a mistake of law?
If they committed the offence under the sincere belief that they were acting with authorization from a law enforcement official (People v. Weiss, Lindbergh baby case)
What is the 2 step process to determine if someone should be liable for a result that constitutes a crime? (Causation)
- Establish whether there is any casual connection (a “but-for” cause, cause-in-fact, or actual cause)
- Then ask whether the above connection is sufficiently close to hold the defendant responsible for the resulting harm (proximate cause or legal cause)
What is the “but-for” test?
Court asks whether the result would have occured “but-for” the actions of the defendant
What circumstance would defeat the but-for test?
If the plight of the victim would have occurred regardless of the actions of the accused
If the “but-for” test fails due to the circumstance (ex. a bar fight kills someone and it is unknown who threw the fetal punch) what takes over?
The “substantial factor” test, which asks of the actions of the accused substantially affected the outcome. Ex. A person who shoots someone as they are falling to their death would still be liable as they accelerated the death
If the consequence of a person’s actions are ____ then it would be held that the person is a proximate cause of the event, regardless f the length of time between action and consequence.
Reasonably forseeable
To prove causation (as demonstrated in Oxendine v. State) there must be BRD proof that the accused ___
directly caused or hastened the consequence
Common law and MPC both hold that ___ constitutes knowledge
willful blindness
What is the common law definition for a mistake of fact?
A mistake of fact is a defence to a specific intent crime if it negates the specific mens rea, whether the mistake is reasonable or unreasonable. Even aa unreasonable mistake made in good faith operates as a defence if it negates a required men rea
The common law holds that a mistake of fact is a defence to a general intent crime only if ___
the mistake was reasaonble
A mistake of fact is never a defence against___
strict liability crimes
Does the MPC distinguish between specific and general intent crimes?
No
Under Common Law, what is required for a person to be liable for a homicde?
The accused must be the proximately legal cause. That they reasaaonbly foresaw the possible consequence when they acted.
What breaks the chain of causation?
Unforseeable events
Billy throws a ball to Mandy who follows the ball under a tree that is struck by lightning, and also kills Mandy. Is Billy liable?
Only if he reasonably foresaw (ex saw stormcluds, and was aware of the risk that that tree would be struck by lightning)
If an intervening cause is ___ it will not break the chain of causation because ___. If an intervening cause is ___ it will break the chain of causation because ____.
Responsive. Because it was an act that occurred as a foreseeable consequence of the initial action.
Coincidental. Because it could not be foreseen by the initial actor.
