Crim: Homicide

Front 1

Murder

Back 1

At common law and under many present statutes, murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.

Front 2

Malice Aforethought

Back 2

“Malice aforethought” is sometimes defined as the “intention to kill, actual or implied, under circumstances which do not constitute excuse or justification or mitigate the offense to manslaughter.” The intent to kill is “actual” where the defendant consciously desired to cause death, and “implied” where the defendant intended to cause great bodily harm or where the natural tendency of his behavior was to cause death or great bodily harm. No ill will or hatred of the victim need be shown.

Front 3

Malice Aforethought-- Functional Definition

Back 3

Malice aforethought is best regarded as a term of art encompassing several different mental states. Malice aforethought exists if, at the time of the killing, the defendant entertained any one of the following states of mind: (1) intent to kill; (2) intent to inflict great bodily harm; (3) intent to commit a felony; and (4) awareness of a high risk of death ("abandoned and malignant heart" or "depraved mind").

Front 4

Degrees of Murder

Back 4

At common law, there were no degrees of murder. Statutes, however, often divide murder into first and second degree

Front 5

Premeditated Killings

Back 5

Premeditated killings are those in which the intent to kill is formed with some reflection, deliberation, reasoning, or weighing, rather than simply on a sudden impulse. Courts often do not require a showing that the defendant had a long period of time during which the evidence suggests that he premeditated. Rather, these courts reason that the formulation of the intent to kill by premeditation and the defendant’ s final decision to act upon this intent can occur as instantaneously as successive thoughts.

Front 6

First Degree Murder

Back 6

The offense of 1st degree murder has no common law equivalent; it is entirely a creation of statute. While generalization is somewhat difficult, first degree murder usually encompasses those murders committed with some degree of premeditation or deliberation.

Front 7

Premeditation

Back 7

Premeditated killings are those in which the intent to kill is formed with some reflection, deliberation, reasoning, or weighing, rather than simply on a sudden impulse. While there is general agreement on the abstract definition of premeditation, courts disagree on the evidence necessary to show it.

Front 8

Premeditation-- No Appreciable Time Needed

Back 8

Courts often do not require a showing that the defendant had a long period of time during which the evidence suggests that he premeditated. Rather, these courts reason that the deliberation period can be as short as a few seconds.

Front 9

Felony Murder Rule

Back 9

A killing—even an accidental one—will be murder if it was caused with the intent to commit a felony. This is the “felony murder” rule. Broadly speaking, the rule provides that any killing committed during the course of a felony is murder. No intent to kill or other mental state regarding the occurrence of death is required; thus, this is a form of strict liability. The felony on which a particular prosecution is based is often called the “predicate felony.”

Front 10

Rationale for Felony Murder Rule

Back 10

Two justifications have been advanced in support of the felony murder rule. First, it is argued that the rule deters felonies by adding to the threat of conviction. Second, it is argued that the rule discourages the use of violence during the commission of felonies by imposing the threat of additional punishment if the felon causes death. Some have questioned whether, in fact, the rule functions in either way.

Front 11

Limitations on Felony Murder Rule

Back 11

Death of victim must have been “foreseeable”; felony must be inherently dangerous; felony must be independent of the killings; one of the felons must have directly caused death; death must occur in the perpetration of felony.

Front 12

Voluntary Manslaughter

Back 12

A killing that would otherwise be murder but that was committed in response to certain provocation has traditionally been regarded as being without malice aforethought and therefore voluntary manslaughter. The defendant must, of course, have acted with one of the states of mind necessary for malice aforethought, but the provocation reduces the killing from murder to manslaughter.

Front 13

Elements of Provocation

Back 13

At common law, a killing is reduced from murder to manslaughter only if all of the following 4 elements are present. Even under modern statutes, these requirements are generally maintained: (i) There must have been provocation of the kind that would cause a reasonable person to lose control and act rashly (this is an objective standard); (ii) The defendant must have in fact been provoked (this is a subjective standard); (iii) The interval between the provocation and the killing must not have been long enough for the passions of a reasonable person to cool (this is an objective standard); (iv) the passions of the defendant must not have actually cooled.

Front 14

Reinflaming Occurrences

Back 14

Although an adequate cooling off period may have passed, intervening events can still remind the defendant of the provoking event and “reinflame” his passions. Courts have varied on whether the cooling period should begin anew with the reinflaming occurrence, but the better view is that it should.

Front 15

Involuntary Manslaughter

Back 15

An unintended killing is involuntary manslaughter if: (1) it is the result of criminal negligence; or (2) it is caused during the commission of an unlawful act that is not a felony or that for some other reason is insufficient to trigger the felony murder rule.

Front 16

Criminal Negligence

Back 16

Although it is often unclear what precisely is required for criminal negligence, the courts agree that there must be more than is necessary to establish civil liability for damages. Thus, to be liable for involuntary manslaughter, the defendant must have exhibited “wanton or reckless” conduct which goes beyond even gross negligence.

Front 17

MPC Approach

Back 17

Modern statutes tend to redefine the homicide offenses by grading them according to the different states of mind as defined by the MPC.

Front 18

MPC-- Murder

Back 18

Under this approach, murder is defined as a killing committed: (i) purposefully, (ii) knowingly, or (iii) recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life.

Front 19

MPC-- Manslaughter

Back 19

The MPC abandons the distinction between the two traditional types of manslaughter and instead creates a single manslaughter offense. Under this scheme, manslaughter is: (i) a killing committed recklessly, or (ii) a killing that would otherwise be murder but is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse.

Front 20

MPC-- Negligent Murder

Back 20

In addition, the MPC creates the new homicide offense of “negligent homicide” consisting of killings committed negligently.