Page 18 Flashcards
What is the redline rule?
There is no felony murder liability when a non-felon kills a felon, but there is liability when a non-felon kills another non-felon, or a felon kills another felon
What is the majority position for vicarious responsibility of co-felons?
All felons are liable for any homicide that happens during the commission of a felony
If a victim aims at a felon, but misses and kills a bystander, who is liable?
The felons, because a non-felon killed another non-felon
What are the exceptions to vicarious responsibility for a nonviolent co-felon?
- D didn’t commit the homicide or solicit it
- D wasn’t armed with a deadly weapon
- D had no reasonable grounds to believe that any of his co-felons were armed
- D had no reasonable grounds to believe that any of his co-felons intended to engage in conduct likely to result in death/GBI
All parties are guilty for deviations from the common plan in a felony situation that are the what?
Foreseeable consequences of carrying out the plan
Would an accidental shooting during an armed robbery be a foreseeable deviation from the plan?
Totally
All parties are guilty for deviations from the common plan that are the foreseeable consequences of carrying out the plan and also for unforeseeable what?
Deaths, like heart attacks, that happen during the felony
What would be one exception to co-felon vicarious liability?
If a co-felon does something that is so far removed from the plan as not to be foreseeable, and the others had no idea it was going to happen, and it doesn’t further the plan
If a co-felon rapes and kills a woman while waiting for the others to arrive, and that wasn’t part of the plan, are the others responsible for that death?
No, because it was far removed from the plan, wasn’t foreseeable, they had no idea it was going to happen, and it didn’t further the plan
What happens to vicarious liability for co-felons in situations where an independent intervening event occurs?
Unforeseeable acts of third parties that are not privileged by an affirmative defense cut off liability
If you burgle a home, and that person goes crazy and starts shooting down the street, and kills a neighbor, are you responsible?
No, because it was an independent intervening event that was unforeseeable and not justified, so his act was illegal and cut off your liability
If a justification is present for the underlying crime of FM, then what happens?
It transforms the label from murder into no crime
What are the four different justifications that would transform a crime into no crime?
- victim engaged in crime
- self-defense
- defense of others
- reasonable mistake
What are the two reactions that are justified if a victim is engaged in crime?
- crime prevention
* apprehension of a fleeing felon
How are your actions justified if you were trying to prevent someone from committing a dangerous felony?
Only if deadly force is reasonably necessary
When are you justified in apprehending a fleeing felon?
If the fleeing felon poses a significant threat to police/public
When are you not justified in apprehending a fleeing felon?
If the felon was just running away, you cannot use deadly force
When is proportional force not necessary in a self-defense situation?
When you have to consider the parties involved. If a very small, weak man is confronted by a large body builder, it is possible that a punch from the bodybuilder could kill the small man, so if he reacts by shooting the bodybuilder, that might be justified
What are the two positions on whether a reasonable mistake is considered a justification or not?
- majority: allows it, if the mistaken belief is reasonable and in good faith
- minority: does not allow it
How is a mistaken belief reasonable?
If a reasonable and prudent person in the same situation would have made the same mistake
How is the mistaken belief made in good faith?
If this particular defendant made the mistake
If you walk down the street and see your enemy approach, knowing you have both sworn to kill each other, but not knowing he has chosen to bury the hatchet, so when he raises his arm to wave, you think he is pulling out a weapon, and you shoot and kill him. Could that be a reasonable mistake that would count as a justification?
If you reasonably and in good faith believed you were being threatened, that is a justification
What are the four excuses that can transform a murder into no crime, or a lesser crime?
- Youth
- Insanity
- Involuntary intoxication
- Mitigation to voluntary manslaughter
How can youth be an excuse to murder?
- A child that is under seven is incapable of committing a crime
- 7 to 14 is rebuttably incapable
What does it mean to be rebuttably incapable of something?
Presumption of incapability, but evidence can prove otherwise by showing the person knew what he was doing
How is insanity an excuse for murder?
Defendant has a legal excuse for his behavior, and the final label is no crime
How is involuntary intoxication an excuse for murder?
If it produces a mental impairment equal to insanity
Is voluntary intoxication an excuse for murder?
No
What is manslaughter?
Unlawful killing of another human being without malice aforethought
What is considered legal provocation?
Anything that would cause a reasonable man to lose his self-control
When might you be charged with voluntary manslaughter in a self-defense situation?
If you’re defending yourself, but under the circumstances you couldn’t raise self-defense to excuse your act entirely
When can you have voluntary manslaughter?
If there was provocation, extreme emotional distress, or imperfect self-defense
What are the ways that a crime can be mitigated down to voluntary manslaughter?
- good faith mistake
- provocation, or
- coercion/necessity
What is MPC voluntary manslaughter?
Killing that is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. Doesn’t require a specific act of provocation (can just act from emotional/mental distress).
What are the ways that MPC voluntary manslaughter is different from common-law voluntary manslaughter?
- doesn’t require an act of specific provocation
- emotions other than rage are included
- from the viewpoint of a reasonable person in the defendant’s shoes
- cooling time is not an issue because focuses on the defendant’s emotional disturbance at the time of the killing, not his reaction to the provocation
- words alone are enough
- diminished capacity is acknowledged
Is diminished capacity applicable to common-law voluntary manslaughter?
No, because it conflicts with the reasonable man standard that presumes a person without serious mental and emotional defects
