mbe crim law Flashcards
jurisdiction
the US has power to criminalize and prosecute crimes that
* occur on US territory
* occur on ships and planes or
* are committed by US nationals abroad
states can only punish crimes having some connection to the state
* a crime that occurs in whole or in party inside the state
* conduct outside the state that involved an attempt to commit a crime inside the state
* a conspiracy to commit a crime if an overt act occurred within the state
actus reus
No such thing as a “thought” crime. Wanting or hoping to commit a crime is not itself a crime.
(1) There must be some physical act in the world
* Act can be speech
(2) Act must be voluntary
* Involuntary act does not satisfy the actus reus requirement
* “Voluntary” does not necessarily mean the person wanted to do it. It means that he had motor control over the act.
(3) The failure to act can be sufficient actus reus
* Failure to comply with a statutory duty (failing to file tax return, failing to register for selective service)
* special relationship between defendant and victim (parent-child)
* Voluntarily assuming a duty of care that is cast aside
* The defendant causes a peril and fails to mitigate harm to the victim caused by the peril
mens rea: specific intent crimes
defendant committed the actus reus and did it for the very purpose of causing the result that the act criminalizes
- assault with attempt to commit a battery
- larceny
- accomplice liability/accessory before the fact
- false pretenses
- accessory after the fact
- first degree murder
- inchoate crimes (conspiracy, attempt, soliciation)
- theft offenses (larceny, embezzlement, forgery, burglary, and robbery
forgery
Forgery is:
(1) the making of a false writing of apparent legal significance with
(2) the specific intent to defraud.
“Making” includes creating a document, altering a document, or fraudulently inducing another to sign a document when that person is unaware of the significance of the document.
mens rea: malice
I “AM”certain that there are only two malice crimes: arson and murder
Malice exists when the defendant acts in reckless disregard of a high degree of harm. The defendant realizes the risk and acts anyway.
mens rea: general intent crimes
Catch-all category
The intent to perform an act, and the act is unlawful
The defendant does not need to know that the act is unlawful; it is sufficient to intend to perform the act that the law condemns
Generally, acts done knowingly, recklessly, or negligently under the Model Penal Code (MPC) are general-intent crimes.
examples:
1. battery
2. arson
3. rape
4. kidnapping
(attempt of general intent crime still needs the specific intent to commit general intent crime)
mens rea: strict liability
There is no state of mind requirement; the defendant must merely have committed the act
- Statutory/Regulatory offenses
- Morals offenses
mens rea: MPC states of mind
The MPC expresses mens rea as: purpose, knowledge, recklessness, and negligence. The MPC also recognizes some strict liability crimes
Hierarchy of mental states:
1. purpose- highest level of culpability
2. Knowledge
3. Recklessness
4. Negligence—lowest level of culpability
Look for the mens rea requirement in the statute through words like “knowingly” or “intent to”
If there is no mens rea language, assume the prosecutor must prove recklessness
(1) purposely
The defendant’s conscious objective is to engage in the conduct or to cause a certain result
(2) knowingly or willfully
Requires that the defendant be aware that his conduct is of the nature required to commit the crime and that the result is practically certain to occur based on his conduct
(3) recklessly
Requires the defendant to act with a conscious disregard of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct of a law- abiding person
(4) negligently
The defendant should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and acts in a way that grossly deviates from the standard of care of a reasonable person in the same situation
mens rea: interpreting statutes
If a statute does not state the culpable mind applicable to all material elements of the crime, then the mens rea applicable to one material element is applicable to all material elements unless a contrary purpose plainly appears.
For example, if a statute states: it is a crime to knowingly sell, distribute, or barter a sexually explicit film featuring actors younger than the age of majority.
the “knowingly” state of mind is applied to both the “sell, distribute, or barter a sexually explicit film” element and the “featuring actors younger than the age of majority” element.
so, if someone sells a sex film with minors, but they dont know they are minors, then they CAN’T be convicted under this statute
mens rea: interpreting statutes
If a statute does not state the culpable mind applicable to all material elements of the crime, then the mens rea applicable to one material element is applicable to all material elements unless a contrary purpose plainly appears.
For example, if a statute states: it is a crime to knowingly sell, distribute, or barter a sexually explicit film featuring actors younger than the age of majority.
the “knowingly” state of mind is applied to both the “sell, distribute, or barter a sexually explicit film” element and the “featuring actors younger than the age of majority” element.
so, if someone sells a sex film with minors, but they dont know they are minors, then they CAN’T be convicted under this statute
mens rea: transferred intent
When a defendant has the requisite mens rea for committing a crime against Victim A, but actually commits the crime against Victim B, the law transfers the intent from Victim A over to Victim B.
Can apply to:
HAM (Homicide, Arson, Murder)
mens rea: vicarious liability
Holds a person or entity liable for an actus reus committed by someone else
A corporation can be liable for the actions of its high-level employees or the Board of Directors.
mens rea: merger
A defendant can be convicted of more than one crime arising out of the same act.
A defendant cannot be convicted of two crimes when the two crimes merge into one.
Two categories of merger:
1. lesser-included offenses and
2. the merger of an inchoate and a completed offense
(1) lesser included offenses
* Lesser-included offense—an offense in which each of its elements appears in another offense, but the other offense has something additional
(2) inchoate and completed offenses
* Attempt— A defendant who actually completed a crime cannot also be convicted of attempt that crime.
* Solicitation—Merges into the completed offense
* Conspiracy and a completed substantive offense do not merge; A defendant can be convicted of both conspiracy to commit a crime and committing the crime itself.
principals, accomplices, aiders, and abettors
children
At common law, children under the age of 7 were never capable of committing a crime.
children ages 7-14 were rebutabbly presumed to be incapable of committing crimes
children at least 14 could be charged as adults
principals
defendant whose acts or omissions form the actus reus of the crime
Can be more than one principal to a particular crime
Ask: Who committed the actus reus that gives rise to the offense?
Accomplices
Theory for holding people other than the principal responsible for the crime committed by the principal; same degree of responsibility as the principal
people who assist in the prinicpal either before or during the commission of a crime
must act with the intent of assisting the principal to commit the crime; bystanders, even approving ones, are not accomplices
Liable as an accomplice for both the planned crime and any other foreseeable crimes that occur in the course of the criminal act
An accomplice can be criminalyl liable even if he or she cannot be a principal or even if the principal cannot be convicted.
Exception: A person protected by a statute cannot be an accomplice in violating the statute
exception: exempted necessary party: person is excluded from liability as an accomplice if:
* the crime requires more than one participant
* the criminal statute imposes liability on one participant and
* the person acts as the nonliable participant
VVVVVVVVVVVV
Accessories After the Fact
People who assist the defendant after the crime has been committed (e.g., obstruction of justice or harboring a fugitive)
VVVVVVVVVVVV
Aiders/Abettors and Conspiracy
In addition to accomplice liability for the substantive crime, individuals who aid or abet a defendant to commit a crime may also be guilty of the separate crime of conspiracy if there was an agreement to commit the crime and an overt act was taken in furtherance of that agreement.
VVVVVVVVVVVV
The Mental States of Accomplices
Majority and MPC Approaches—the accomplice must act with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense; the accomplice must know that her acts will assist or encourage the criminal conduct.
Minority Approach—the accomplice is liable if he intentionally or knowingly aids or causes another person to commit an offense.
Criminal Facilitation—under the majority rule, a person who is not guilty of the substantive crime (because he did not act with intent) may nevertheless be guilty of the lesser offense of criminal facilitation for simply assisting
Types of Homicide
homicide: the killing of a living human being by another human being
* Animals cannot commit a homicide and killing an animal is not a homicide;
* victim cannot already be dead
* suicide is not homicide, but assisting someone to commit suicide can be a homicide
VVVVVVVVVVVVV
There must be a causal relationship between the defendant’s actions and what happened to the victim
actual causation: victim would not have died “but for” what the defendant did
proximate cuasation: Defendant’s act is a foreseeable cause of the victim’s death (death is natural and probable result of conduct)
* Independent actions by a third person are generally not a foreseeable cause
* Assisted suicide is a homicide by the assister, except in jurisdictions that permit assisted suicide
two types of homicide:
1. murder
2. manslaughter
Types of Murder
(1) first-degree murder:
Specific-intent crime, typically defined as a deliberate and pre-meditated murder, or a killing that results during the commission of an inherently dangerous felony (i.e., felony murder is frequently classified as first-degree murder)
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
(2) Common law murder:
unlawful killing of another human being committed with malice aforethought
Lawful killing of another is not murder (e.g., state execution or a police officer’s justifiable use of deadly force)
four kinds of malice
1. intent to kill: The defendant acted with the desire that the victim end up dead. intent need not be premeditated; it can be formed in the moment before the killing
2. intent to inflict serious bodily injury: intent to injure, but they die
3. abandoned, malignant, or Depraved Heart: reckless disregard of human life (NO INTENT)
people are present: the defendant acted with a cavalier disregard for human life and a death resulted. Defendant must realize that his conduct is really risky but need not have any intent regarding the outcome of his actions.
Majority and MPC—defendant must actually realize that there is a danger
Minority—a reasonable person would have recognized the danger
(4) felony murder: death resulting from commission of dangerous felony –> BARRK: Burglary, Arson, Rape, Robbery, Kidnapping ( Majority of jurisdictions= the underlying felony is deemed a lesser-included offense of felony murder, defendant cannot be convicted of both the underlying felony and felony murder)
Deaths caused by other felonies get the label of misdemeanor manslaughter.
Felony murder can involve:
* someone who resists the felony
* when a bystander is killed during a felony
* third person killed by the resister or police officer (minority)
* Majority—agency (co-felon) theory: A defendant is only responsible for the crimes of the defendant’s “agents.” Because the victim, police, or third party are not the defendant’s agents, the defendant is not responsible for their conduct.
* minority proximate cause theory= defendant responsible for deaths cause by any person (co-felony, police, bystander)
* If a co-felon is killed by a resister or a police officer, then the defendant is not guilty of felony murder
Types of Manslaughter
all unlawful killings of another human being that are not first- degree murder or common law murder
two types: voluntary and involuntary
- voluntary
- Occurs when a defendant intends to kill the victim, but his state of mind is less blameworthy than murder
- adequate provocations (ordinary person standard)
heat of passion (in a daze)
no time to cool off (just snapped)
but if he did cool off, it could be rekindles (by seeing his wife with the cheating friend again after catching them in bed hours earlier) - NOTHING TO DO WITH INTENT! INTENT IS MURDER.
- involuntary
* Negligent or reckless conduct causing death or killing of someone while committing a crime other than those covered by felony murder (like misdemeanor manslaughter)
* A defendant who engages in criminally negligent conduct and causes a death is guilty of involuntary manslaughter (e.g., traffic deaths)
* no people are around
adequate provocation could be getting kicked in the groin twice, but not when a friend smashes your tv while watching sports game
Inchoate Crimes
crimes occuring before underlying crime:
1. attempt
2. conspiracy
3. solicitation
Under the Model Penal Code, a defendant may be concurrently prosecuted for, but not convicted of, more than one inchoate offense (i.e., solicitation, conspiracy, and attempt) based on conduct designed to culminate in the commission of the same crime
inchoate –> attempt
attempt is a specific intent crime
requirements:
- criminal intent to commit crime (attempt of general intent crime needs the specific intent to commit general intent crime, if attempted murder even if it fits depraved heart he would actually need intent to commit murder)
AND - overt act/substantial step to completing crime
under common law dangerous proximity test, an act occurs when it brings the defendant in dangerous proximity to completing the target offense (no dangerous proximity where you solicited someone to commit a crime for $ but you have not paid yet)
Attempt is a specific-intent crime even when the completed offense is only a general intent crime
VVVVVVVV
defenses
Defenses for specific-intent crimes can be used as a defense to attempt
Certain defenses like voluntary intoxication and unreasonable mistake of fact are available even if they wouldn’t be available had the crime been completed.
VVVVVVVV
merger
Attempt merges into a completed offense
you cannot be convicted of both attempted murder and murder of the same person in the same episode
You can be convicted of both conspiracy to commit murder and murder
defense of others
an individual has the same right to defend other individuals against a criminal that she has to defend herself
inchoate crimes–> conspiracy
common law conspiracy requires:
* an agreement
* between 2 or more people
* to commit an unlawful act
modern conspiracy statutes:
Add a fourth element: The performance of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy
Model Penal Code (MPC):
Only the defendant must actually agree to commit the unlawful act. The other people with whom the defendant agrees can be undercover agents, for example
agreement can be explicit or implicit
* simply knowing a crime is going to occur and doing nothing about it does not turn a bystander into a co-conspirator; there must be an agreement.
Purpose of the conspiracy Unlawful act
* If what the conspirators agree to do is not a crime, there is no conspiracy even if they think what they’re doing is wrong.
Overt act: Can be lawful or unlawful, as long as it furthers the conspiracy
VVVVVVVVVVVVV
scope of conspiracy
At common law, each co conspirator can be convicted both of:
1. conspiracy and
2. All substantive crimes committed by any other conspirator acting in furtherance of the conspiracy
IF YOU DO NOT WITHDRAW BEFORE CONSPIRED ACT COMPLETED, YOU CAN BE CHARGED WITH COMPLETED ACT!
Relationships of co-conspirators
* Chain Conspiracy: Co-conspirators are engaged in an enterprise consisting of many steps; each participant is liable for the substantive crimes of his co-conspirators
* Spoke-Hub Conspiracy: Involves many people dealing with a central hub; participants are not liable for the substantive crimes of their co-conspirators because each spoke is treated as a separate agreement rather than one larger general agreement
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Common law—it’s impossible to withdraw from a conspiracy, because the crime is completed the moment the agreement is made.
federal and MPC: a conspirator can withdraw prior to the commission of any overt act by communicating her intention to withdraw to all other conspirators or by informing law enforcement
* After an overt act—a conspirator can withdraw only by helping to thwart the success of a conspiracy.
* Even if a defendant cannot withdraw from the conspiracy (e.g., because a conspiracy had already been formed), the defendant can limit his liability for substantive crimes by informing the other conspirators of withdrawal or timely advising legal authorities.
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
charging co-conspirators
Since the common law follows the bilateral approach to conspiracy, a conviction requires proof of at least two guilty minds. For this reason, and because of the need for consistency in verdicts returned by a single jury,* a conspirator cannot be convicted if all other coconspirators are acquitted at the same trial.*
inchoate crimes –> conspiracy–> MPC
Model penal code: unilateral theory of conspiracy.
1 individual, on their own, decides, agrees in their head, decides to commit crime= conspiracy
