Mens Rea (CL and MPC) Element

Question 1

CL Culpalbility of Mens Rea

Answer 1

Defined broadly in terms of having a morally blameworthy or culpable state of mind.

Is sufficient to prove that D acted with a culpable state of mind, without the need to demonstrate a specific state of mind such as “intentionally,” “knowingly,” or “recklessly”

Question 2

CL Elemental Mens Rea

Answer 2

The particular mental state set out in the definition of an offense. In this sense, the specific mens rea is an element of the crime.

Note that a person can be culpable in that he was morally blameworthy yet lacks the requisite elemental mens rea.

Question 3

CL Specific Intent

Answer 3

definition of the crime includes an intent or purpose to do some future act, or to achieve some further consequence, beyond the conduct or result that constitutes the actus reus of the offense.

Question 4

CL BAFFLE PACK

Answer 4

Burglary, Attempt, Forgery, False pretenses, Larceny, Embezzlement, Premeditated murder (first degree), Assault, Conspiracy and solicitation, and Kidnapping (for ransom)

Question 4

CL General Intent

Answer 4

the definition does not contain any specific intent beyond that which relates to the actus reus itself

Question 5

Transferred Intent Doctrine

Answer 5

deems culpability to a defendant who intending to kill (or injure) one person, accidentally kills (or injures) another person instead. The law transfers the actor’s state of mind regarding the intended victim to the unintended one

Question 6

Does MPC accept Transferred Intent?

Answer 6

Yes, MPC also follows the most respects, the common law, transferred intent doctrine

Question 7

Willful Blindness

Answer 7

Ostrich analogy- bury their heads in the sand so that they will not hear or see bad things. The D deliberately avoids acquiring unpleasant knowledge.

Question 8

MPC Porpusely

Answer 8

D’s conscious object to cause the harm or do the act

Question 9

MPC Knowingly

Answer 9

not D’s conscious object, but D is aware that it is practically certain that the social harm would occur.

Question 10

MPC Wilful Blindness Doctrine

Answer 10

knowledge is established, if a person is aware of a high probability of the AC existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist.

Question 11

MPC Recklessly

Answer 11

Subjective fault–D consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk of causing a particular result

Question 12

MPC Negligently

Answer 12

Objective standard–D as a reasonable person, should have been aware of the substantial and unjustifiable risk he was taking

Question 13

Strict Liability Doctrine

Answer 13

No culpable mental state at all must be shown – it is enough that D performed the act in question, regardless of his mental state

Question 14

Public Welfare Offenses

Answer 14

malum prohibitum–> wrong because we (the law) prohibits it (not necessarily immoral)

Question 15

Factors for Public Welfare Offenses

Answer 15

1. Public welfare offense are not derived from the common law
2. A single violation of such an offense can simultaneously injure a great number of people
3. Standard imposed by the statute is reasonable
4. Penalty for the violation is minor
5. Conviction rarely damages the D’s rep.

Question 16

Nonpublic Welfare Offenses

Answer 16

crime that is inherently immoral/evil (stigmatized crimes and more severe punishment)

Statutory Rape- does not require any element of D’s knowledge of female being underage

Question 17

MPC Mistake of Fact

Answer 17

If the honest mistake of fact/law negates the mental state required to establish any element of the offense,then the mistake of fact is a defense for the .

Question 18

MPC Mistake of Fact EXCEPTION

Answer 18

Defense of mistake of fact is not available if the actor would be guilty of another offense, has the circumstances been as he supposed

Question 19

CL Mistake of Fact

Answer 19

 Can relieve an actor of liability:
 D commits an act under an honest and reasonable belief that they were not committing a crime
 D is guilty of a general intent crime if the mistake of fact was unreasonable and they acted either recklessly or negligently
 Mistake of fact cannot be a defense against strict liability offenses

Question 20

CL crime with specific intent and mistake of fact?

Answer 20

a mistake of fact will exculpate D if the mistake negates the specific intent- particular element- of the crime (elemental approach to mistakes) i.e. he lacks the intent required in the definition of the offense.

Question 21

CL crime with general intent and mistake of fact?

Answer 21

a reasonable mistake of fact is a defense, an unreasonable mistake of fact is not a defense (YOU DO A MENTAL CULPABLITY ANALYSIS) (BLAMEWORTHY)