Terms and concepts

Question 1

Embezzlement cases

Answer 1

Commonwealth v. Mitchneck (PA 1938) - employer deducts from wages amounts owed to grocery store but does not pay; NOT embezzlement, gives rise to CIVIL but NOT criminal liability

State v. Polzin (Wash. 1939) - D runs loan company, receives promissory note from X, then D goes to X’s creditors and convinces them to retain D for collection services. D pays creditors and keeps 1/3 as collection fee. NOT larceny, D not a custodian of X’s money.

MPC - critical of Mitchneck and Polzin - establishes new crime of “theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received (MPC Sec. 223.8)

Question 2

AIRCD

Answer 2

Act + Intent + Result = Crime - Defense

Question 3

PURNK

Answer 3

PUrposely, Knowingly, Recklessly, Negligently

Question 4

Recklessness

Answer 4

The conscious disregard of a known risk.

(excerpt below from 2009 Hawaii code vol. 14)

(a) A person acts recklessly with respect to his conduct when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the person’s conduct is of the specified nature.
(b) A person acts recklessly with respect to attendant circumstances when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that such circumstances exist.
(c) A person acts recklessly with respect to a result of his conduct when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his conduct will cause such a result.
(d) A risk is substantial and unjustifiable within the meaning of this section if, considering the nature and purpose of the person’s conduct and the circumstances known to him, the disregard of the risk involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the same situation.

Question 5

Negligence

Answer 5

Failure to use the care that a normally careful person would in a given situation.

(excerpt below from 2009 Hawaii code vol. 14)

(a) A person acts negligently with respect to his conduct when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk taken that the person’s conduct is of the specified nature.
(b) A person acts negligently with respect to attendant circumstances when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that such circumstances exist.
(c) A person acts negligently with respect to a result of his conduct when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his conduct will cause such a result.
(d) A risk is substantial and unjustifiable within the meaning of this subsection if the person’s failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a law- abiding person would observe in the same situation. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1983, c 132, §1; am L 1986, c 314, §4]

Question 6

Omission liability

Answer 6

1. Creator of danger
2. Protector - Special relationship (parent/child, spouses, doc/patient, house guest)
3. Rescuer
4. Landowners

Question 7

Default mens rea when not listed by statute for CL vs. MPC

Answer 7

CL = knowing (US v. Staples - illegal weapon registration)

MPC = recklessness (§2.02(3))