Crim

Front 1

specific intent crimes

Back 1

First-degree murder

Inchoate offenses (attempt, solicitation, conspiracy)

Assault with intent to commit a battery

Theft offenses (larceny, larceny by trick, false pretenses, embezzlement, forgery, burglary, robbery).

Front 2

accomplice CL

Back 2

-a person who

-with intent that the crime be committed

-aids or abets a principal

-prior to or during the commission of the crime.

Front 3

accomplice NY

Back 3

-soliciting, requesting, commanding, urging, or intentionally aiding

-in the commission of a crime

-while acting with the mental culpability required for the commission thereof.

Front 4

a principal in the second degree

Back 4

An accomplice who is physically or constructively present during the commission of the crime

Front 5

an accessory before the fact

Back 5

1) is neither physically nor constructively present during the commission of the crime, but who,

2)with the requisite intent to encourage or assist in the commission of the crime,

3) provided verbal encouragement, financial assistance, or physical assistance to the principal prior to the commission of the crime

Front 6

Accomplice’s criminal liability

Back 6

is responsible for the crime to the same extent as the principal.

the accomplice is liable for the other crimes principal commits if the crimes are the natural and probable consequences of the accomplice’s conduct.

Front 7

Withdrawal from Accomplice Liability CL

Back 7

(i) repudiate prior aid,

(ii) do all that is possible to countermand prior assistance, and

(iii) do so before the chain of events is in motion and unstoppable.

Front 8

Withdrawal from Accomplice Liability NY

Back 8

(i) renounce his criminal purpose completely and voluntarily,

(ii) withdraw from participation prior to commission of the crime, and

(iii) make a substantial effort to prevent the commission of the crime.

Front 9

M’Naghten test

Back 9

the defendant is not guilty if,

because of a defect of reason due to a mental disease,

the defendant did not know either (i) the nature and quality of the act or (ii) the wrongfulness of the act.

Front 10

Irresistible-impulse test

Back 10

the defendant is not guilty if he lacked the capacity for self-control and free choice because mental disease or defect prevented him from being able to conform his conduct to the law.

Front 11

Durham rule

Back 11

a defendant is not guilty if the unlawful act was the product of the defendant’s mental disease or defect and would not have been committed but for the disease or defect.

Front 12

Insanity NY

Back 12

upon proof by a preponderance of the evidence that,

at the time of the conduct

and as a result of mental disease or defect,

the defendant lacked the substantial capacity to know or appreciate:i) The nature and consequences of his conduct; orii) That his conduct was wrong.

Front 13

Felony murder CL

Back 13

-unintended killing

-proximately caused

-by and during the commission or attempted commission

-of an inherently dangerous felony.