Parts of Crime Flashcards
Actus Reus
a voluntary act or omission and the attendant circumstances required of the crime (objective)
Results crimes v. Conduct crimes
result- law punishes because of an unwanted outcome
conduct- law punishes specific behavior
Martin v. State
Actus reus case. Officers carried drunk man onto highway then charged him with being drunk on a highway. It was an involuntary act (since he was carried) and he did not commit the actus reus of the crime.
State v. Utter
Actus reus case. Child stabbed by father with ptsd. It was an irresistible impulse/ automatism so an involuntary act.
What is an omission?
There is usually not a duty to help, unless:
1) special relationship (parents, spouse, employer)
2) contractual obligation
3) legal duty by statute
4) voluntary care begun and you stop others from helping
5) you created a risk of harm to another
People v Beardsley
Man doesn’t help side piece when she OD’ed. No legal duty to act
Barber v. Superior Court
medical ‘omissions’ case. Man comatose after surgery, with family permission doctors took him off life support. There is no legal duty to continue care that has been ineffective
Mens Rea
mental state required for a particular offense (subjective to the mind of the defendant)
What kind of intent is needed for strict liability crimes?
No required mens rea. Only actus reus required
Regina v. Cunningham
Gas pipe stolen and neighbor suffocated by leak. No mens rea to hurt neighbor. The term malice in a criminal statute does not mean general wickedness; it means either (1) an actual intention to do the particular kind of harm that was in fact done or (2) reckless disregard of a foreseeable risk that the harm would result.
General Intent
No particular mental state, just prove:
1) the act was committed by D
2) and D had a morally blameworthy state of mind
General intent crimes
Battery, Rape, Kidnapping, or False Imprisonment
Specific Intent
Crimes with intent in the statute
Some specific intent crimes
Solicitation, attempt, conspiracy, premeditated murder, assault, larceny, burglary forgery, anything else by statute
Malice
(1) an actual intention to do the particular kind of harm that was done or (2) reckless disregard of a foreseeable risk that the harm would result.
People v. Conley
Kid 1 swung wine bottle at another kid 2 who ducked and it hi kid 3. There was transferred intent
What mistake defenses are there to mens rea?
Mistake of fact, mistake of law
Does mistake of fact apply to crimes of general intent?
Only if it is a reasonable mistake that shows D didn’t act with moral blame worthiness.
When does the required mens rea have to exist?
At the time of the crime (concurrence of the elements)
doctrines related to mens rea and mistakes
Moral wrong doctrine: a reasonable mistake does not acquit where, if the facts had been as the actor believed them to be, the actor’s conduct was still immoral
Legal wrong doctrine: if a D’s conduct, based on the facts as he reasonably but mistakenly believed them to be, constitutes a crime then it is a legal wrong and will not be acquitted
transferred intent
When a defendant intends to cause harm to one person but an accident causes the same harm to another
Concurrence of the elements
look at the mens rea at the time of the volitional act that causes the social harm
State v. Rose
D hit a pedestrian and kept driving, drug body underneath the car. Concurrence of the elements at the time of act. To figure out murder or manslaughter, we must know men’s rea at time of death. Since we don’t know time of death, hard to prove concurrence of the elements
