Crim Law

Front 1

Murder

Back 1

homicide committed with malice aforethought

Front 2

Murder Actus Reus
4 options

Back 2

1. D acted alone and caused death
2. Ds ommission caused death
3. act of 3rd party contributed to causing death
4. death was foreseeable result of Ds act or omission
a

Front 3

Ds ommission caused death...

Back 3

must be a duty created by statute, contract, relationship or voluntary undertaking

Front 4

act of 3rd party contributed:
vicarious liability

Back 4

1. solicitation
2. conspiracy
3. accomplice
4. FMR

Front 5

act of 3rd party contributed not vicarious liability then....

Back 5

was it foreseeable?

Front 6

death was foreseeable result of Ds act or ommission

Back 6

example: pamphelt blows in wind and lights shit on fire

Front 7

Mens Rea required for murder

Back 7

Malice

Front 8

malice can be found in 4 instances

Back 8

1. intent to kill
2. intent to inflict great bodily harm
3. depraved heart/ wanton conduct
4. felony murder rule

Front 9

intent to kill

Back 9

1. look at Ds words
2. deadly weapon doctrine
-use of deadly weapon in deadly manner

Front 10

intent to inflict great bodily harm

Back 10

is there serious bodily injury?
where did the injury occur? chest or hand

Front 11

depraved heart / wanton conduct

Back 11

reckless indifference to a known high risk of death or serious bodily injury and someone dies as a consequence
example: shoot gun at building that might have people in it

Front 12

felony murder rule

Back 12

homicide committed during the perpetration of an inherently dangerous felony

Front 13

during the perpetration...

Back 13

from attempt to when the F reaches place of temporary safety

Front 14

inherently dangerous felonies majority rule includes...

Back 14

burglary, arson, rape, robbery and kidnapping
BARRK

Front 15

inherently dangerous felonies minority rule includes....

Back 15

non dangerous felonies committed in a dangerous manner
examples: larceny, receiving stolen property, buying/sellling drugs

Front 16

felony must be independent from the act that caused the death meaning.....

Back 16

cant use assault or battery but u can use burglary!
example: u hit someone they fall and die that is not felony murder but if u rob a bank and shoot teller it is

Front 17

what is a defense to felony muder?

Back 17

a defense to the felony itself!
example: duress- forcing someone to burn down a house and there are ppl in it

Front 18

vicarious liability and FMR

Back 18

all felons are liable for deaths caused by co-felons

Front 19

exceptions to FMR vicarious liability

Back 19

non-felon kills a co-felon

Front 20

proximate cause and FMR

Back 20

the felony must be the proximate cause of the homicide
must be FORESEEABLE

Front 21

involuntary manslaughter rulee/definition

Back 21

homicide committed without malice

Front 22

3 instances of involuntary manslaughter

Back 22

1. intent to inflict slight bodily injury
2. criminal negligence
3. misdemeanor manslaughter

Front 23

intent to inflict slight bodily injury

Back 23

D kills V with no intent to kill or seriously injure, but did have intent to inflict some slight bodily injury.
typically this is a non-aggravated assault/battery that causes death (no weapon)

Front 24

criminal negligence

Back 24

D kills V while acting in a more than ordinary negligent manner but the Ds conduct does not present a high enough risk of death for depraved heart recklessness
- ds conduct is a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe
examples: driving waaay over speedlimit-shooting into abandone building

Front 25

misdemeanor manslaughter

Back 25

aD kills while committing a non inherently dangerous felony or a malum in se as opposed to a malum prohibitum crime

Front 26

malum in se v.
malum prohibitum

Back 26

malum in se:
inherently wrongful
malum prohibitum:
wrongful only because prohibited by statute

Front 27

examples of malum in se

Back 27

Killings that occur while the d was committing misdemeanor battery, larcny, public intoxication or in possession of drugs

Front 28

majority vicarious liability FMR rule

Back 28

no felony murder if non felon kills felon

Front 29

minority vicarious liability FMR

Back 29

no felony murder if non felon kills non felon

Front 30

examples of malum prohibitum

Back 30

Killings that occur while d was driving on a suspended license, passing through a toll gate without paying a toll, unlawfully possessing a firearm or unlawfully defacing the flag is not sufficient for involuntary manslaughter

Front 31

Jusitification

Back 31

if a homicide or any other crime (typically murder question) is justified, the D is not criminally liable for the crime

Front 32

6 types of Justifications

Back 32

1.self- defense
2.self- defense of others
3.crime prevention
4.apprehension/arrest of criminal
5.reasonable mistake
6.defense of habitation/property

Front 33

self defense

Back 33

a.The D may use deadly force to protect against an imminent deadly attack
b.Deadly force must be reasonable and necessary to repel the attacker

Front 34

self defense duty to retreat majority rule

Back 34

The d need not retreat before using deadly force unless the D is the initial aggressor and safe retreat is available

Front 35

self defense duty to retreat minority rule

Back 35

iD must retreat before using deadly force if safe retreat is available unless D
1. is in their own home/car etc
2.Is a police officer
3.Is a victim of a violent felony

Front 36

if D is the initial aggressor when can he assert self defense?

Back 36

i.The D initial aggressor withdraws
1.Clear communication to V that D intends to stop fighting
ii.D initially used non deadly force and is now faced with attacker suddenly using deadly force
iii.If safe retreat is available, the initial aggressor must retreat before using deadly force

Front 37

Defense of Others

Back 37

D can use deadly force if reasonable and necessary to defend another

Front 38

Can a D use deadly force to protect a criminal or initial aggressor who had no right to use self-defense against their attacker?

Back 38

Majority Rule
i.A D can claim defense of others if the V reasonable appears to have the right to use deadly force even if the other does not actually have the right
Minority Rule
i.A d can use no more force than the person they are defending

Front 39

Crime Prevention

Back 39

a police officer or private person may use deadly force if reasonably necessary to prevent the commission of a dangerous felony

Front 40

apprehension/arrest of criminal

Back 40

A police officer or private person may use deadly force if reasonably necessary to prevent apprehend/arrest a dangerous felon

Front 41

notes on apprehension/ arrest of criminal

Back 41

a.A private citizen can only use deadly force if the person apprehended with deadly force is actually guilty of the dangerous felony

b.A private citizen is not entitled to make a reasonable mistake
i.Cops are
ii.We don’t encourage vigilantism

Front 42

Reasonable Mistake

Back 42

A D may use deadly force based on a reasonable mistake as to self-defense, defense of others(majority only) and crime prevention

Only a police officer can use deadly force to apprehend arrest based on a reasonable mistake

Front 43

defense of habitation/ property

Back 43

deadly force cannot be used unless

used to protect occupants of home from violent intruder or if intruder intends to commit a felony inside

Front 44

Excuses

Back 44

if a homicide or any other crime is excused the D is not criminally liable for the crime

Front 45

3 types of excuses

Back 45

1. infancy/ youth
2. insanity
3. intoxication

Front 46

youth infancy

Back 46

under 7 no criminal liability

7-14 rebuttable presumption of no criminal liability

over 14 treated as adult

Front 47

what are the 4 insanity

Back 47

1. M'Naghten
2. Irresistible Impulse Test
3. ALI- MPC test
4. Durham

Front 48

M'Naghten Rule

Back 48

(right/wrong test)
1. D as a result of mental defect did not know the wrongfulness of his act or could not understand the nature and quality of his acts
***Focus is on cognitive/mental impairment not the volitional ability (could he control his conduct or not)

Front 49

Irresistible Impulse Test

Back 49

1. D as a result of mental defect, was unable to control his conduct or conform his conduct to the law
***Focus is on volitional ability not cognitive
***Need not be sudden event

Front 50

ALI/ Model Penal Code Test

Back 50

D lacked the substantial capacity to either appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law

Front 51

Durham Test

Back 51

(no longer used but Mention It ANYWAY)

D is not guilty if his crime was the product of a mental disease or defect

Front 52

Intoxication

Back 52

If the D is intoxicated (legal or illegal substance) at the time of the crime, the intoxication may excise criminal liability

Front 53

Voluntary Intoxication

Back 53

Exists when the D voluntarily and knowingly consumes an intoxicating substance

Ok For: specific intent crimes
NOT ok for: general intent crimes, crimes that require malice, strict liability crimes

Front 54

when can voluntary intoxication negate specific intent crimes

Back 54

only if the D is so intoxicated he cannot form the specific intent required for the crime

Front 55

how does voluntary manslaughter affect a crime of 1st degree murder?

Back 55

It can also preclude a finding of deliberation if the D is charged with 1st degree murder

Front 56

involuntary intoxication

Back 56

Existed when the D involuntarily or unknowingly consumes the intoxicant

Front 57

When is involuntary intoxication a defense to all crimes?

Back 57

when it renders D insane under the applicable insanity tests

Front 58

diminished capacity in minority states

Back 58

A minority of states recognize a diminished capacity defense where evidence of Ds mental defect while insufficient for insanity, is admissible to prove the D did not have or could not form the intent required for the crime

Front 59

mitigation rule

Back 59

1. An intentional killing that would otherwise be murder will be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter under either or both:
1. provocation/heat of passion
2. good faith mistake

Front 60

provocation/ heat of passion

Back 60

1. adequate provocation
that would cause both subjective and objective passion and NO cooling off period

Front 61

subjective v. objective passion

Back 61

subjective:
D must have been actually provoked losing self-control and did not cool off before killing the victim

objective:
The provocation must be one that would have caused a reasonable person to lose self-control and a reasonable person would not have cooled off in the time lapse between the provocation and the time of the killing

Front 62

2 examples of reasonable provocation

Back 62

cathcing spouse cheating

getting hit realy hard by someone

Front 63

degrees of murder

Back 63

first and second

Front 64

2 common types of first degree murder

Back 64

1. premeditated and deliberated
2. FMR

Front 65

premeditated

Back 65

The intent to kill is premeditated if the D has time (even just a few seconds) to think about killing the victim before doing so

Front 66

deliberate

Back 66

The intent to kill is deliberate if the D acted in a calm and cool frame of mind (cold blooded)

Lack of passion

Front 67

note on deliberate

Back 67

i. Usually, deliberation is the bigger issue

ii. If the D was at all angry, excited or suffering any type of mental disturbance, that will likely lead to finding the killing was not deliberate

Front 68

FMR and 1st degree murder

Back 68

the felony must be in a statute!

A murder that satisfies the FMR and is based on one of the specified felonies in the state’s first degree murder statute (usually BARRK crimes) will be sufficient for first degree murder.

Front 69

Note on 1st degree murder

Back 69

i.1st degree murder can only be based on malice established under intent to kill or the felony murder rule

ii.Intent to inflict great bodily harm murder or depraved heart murder are at most second degree murder

Front 70

second degree murder

Back 70

all those that are not 1st degree murder

Front 71

Summary of murder

Back 71

Homicide with malice and no justification excuse or mitigation. Finish with degrees of murder

Front 72

summary of manslaughter

Back 72

Homicide with malice but with mitigation

Front 73

summary of involuntary manslaughter

Back 73

Homicide without malice and no justification or excuse

Front 74

2 types of assault

Back 74

1. attempted battery (back turned)
2. The intentional creation of reasonable apprehension of contact (facing V)

Front 75

attempted battery

Back 75

D attempts but is unsuccessful to cause imminent harmful contact with victim

this is a specific intent crime

Front 76

The intentional creation of reasonable apprehension of contact

Back 76

D attempts to cause V to reasonably apprehend imminent harmful contact

This is a general intent crime

Front 77

battery

Back 77

The unlawful application of force to another person causing bodily injury or offensive contact

Front 78

kidnapping

Back 78

The confinement of another person involving either movement or concealment of the V

Front 79

what kind of intent to theft crimes have

Back 79

specific intent

Front 80

Larceny 4 elements

Back 80

1) trespassory taking and 2) carrying away of the 3)personal property of another 4) with the intent to permanently deprive

Front 81

trespassory

Back 81

1.D must take possession of Vs property without the consent of the C.

2.For consent to exist the V must consent before the taking

if v consents after the taking it is still larceny!

Front 82

taking and carrying away

Back 82

1.D must move the property as part of attempt to take possession

2.Slight movement is enough

Front 83

Personal property of another

Back 83

1.Larceny is a crime against possession not ownership.

2. An owner can commit larceny over property he owns if the owner gives possession of it to the victim

Front 84

With intent to permanently deprive

Back 84

D must have the specific intent to keep the property (no intent to return) and it must exist at the time of the takng

Front 85

continuing trespass

Back 85

If your taking is wrongful and u later inform the intent to steal

Front 86

larceny by trick

Back 86

Taking occurs with the Vs apparent consent

The consent is negated because acquired by the Ds misrepresentation

Front 87

Embezzlement

Back 87

The fraudulent conversion of the property of another by one in rightful possession

Front 88

fraudulent conversion

Back 88

The d must deal with the Vs property in some manner inconsistent with the Vs grant of possession of the property to the D

Gross deviation from the permission

Minor deviations are probably within the scope of consent

Front 89

by one in rightful possession

Back 89

V must first voluntarily give the D rightful possession of the property that the D later fraudulently converts

Front 90

false pretenses

Back 90

The acquisition of title to Ds property by a false representation with the intent to defraud

This is about ownership!

Front 91

acquisition of title

Back 91

The V must intend to pass title not just possession

This is usually when the V intends to sell the property to the D

Front 92

false representation

Back 92

Like larceny by trick the V is falsely induced into the transaction but this transaction is for the passing of title not just possession

Front 93

robbery

Back 93

A larceny committed from the victims person or presence by force or threat of force of immediate bodily harm

Front 94

from victims person or presence

Back 94

the d must take the property from the Vs person or
from the Vs immediate vicinity

Front 95

by force or threat of force of immediate bodily harm

Back 95

the d must use force or threaten immediate bodily harm to accomplish the taking
or immediately reacquire it if V momentarily resists and retakes possession briefly

Front 96

immediate bodily harm

Back 96

threats of future bodily harm, or immediate or later bodily harm are not sufficient for robbery but are sufficient for extortion

Front 97

structure crimes

Back 97

arson
burglary

Front 98

arson

Back 98

The burning of a protected structure of another with malice

Front 99

burning

Back 99

1.There must be some charring of some part of the structure caused by fire
2. A charring of non-fixtures is not sufficient

Front 100

of another

Back 100

1.The protected structure must be in the rightful possession of another when burned
2.Thus a landlord who burns a house rented to a tenant can commit arson
3.Ownership irrelevant

Front 101

malice for arson

Back 101

1.A d is guilty of arson if committed with

a.The intent to burn of the structure or

b.With knowledge of the extremely high risk of the structure burning

Front 102

burglary

Back 102

The trespassory breaking and entering of the protected structure of another with the intent to commit a felony therein (specific intent crime)

Front 103

trespassory

Back 103

d enters without consent of the rightful possessor

Front 104

breaking

Back 104

1.Ds entry into structure must involve physical movement of a door or window
2. could be fraud

Front 105

entering

Back 105

1.Some portion of Ds body or some object D uses to commit the felony inside must enter the structure

Front 106

with the intent to commit a felon therein

Back 106

1.The intent must exist at the time the entry occurs

2.A later formed intent to steal after entry does not qualify and this is larceny

Front 107

preliminary crimes/specific intent crimes

Back 107

attempt,
solicitation,
conspiracy

Front 108

attempt

Back 108

Guilty of attempt if D commits an act of perpetration with the intent to commit the intended crime

Front 109

Act of perpetration

Back 109

1.D must do more than merely prepare to commit the crime

2.D must take a substantial step toward its commission/ Dangerously close to completing the intended crime

Front 110

with intent to commit the crime

Back 110

1. D must have the specific intent to commit the target crime
2. U must have intent to kill in order to have attempted murder!

Front 111

defenses to attempt

Back 111

merger and impossibility

Front 112

merger

Back 112

Attempt merges into the target crime so aq D who actually commits the intended crime cannot be convicted and punished for both attempt and the intended crime

Front 113

impossibility

Back 113

i.Legal and factual
1.If the d does not succeed in committing the target crime, it may be because the target crime was either legally or factually impossible
2.Legal impossibility is a good defense
a.Exists when the acts d intends to commit are not a crime in the jx
3.Factual impossibility is not

Front 114

solicitation

Back 114

D is guilty of solicitation if D asks or requests another to commit a crime with the intent that the person commit the crime (specific intent)

Front 115

solicitation and vicarious liability

Back 115

If the party solicited actually commits the requested crime the solicitor will also be liable for the crime

Front 116

conspiracy

Back 116

D is guilty of conspiracy if D enters into an agreement with another party to/for an unlawful objective and some overt act is performed in furtherance of the unlawful objective

Front 117

agreement

Back 117

a. Can exist by express words or it can be implied by conduct
b. Co-conspirators need not meet or even know each other exist
c. So long as they are working toward a common unlawful goal an agreement exists

Front 118

with another party majority rule

Back 118

i.Requires all conspirators to actually agree to commit the unlawful objective

ii.An agreement with undercover cops who only feigns agreement is not a conspiracy

Front 119

with another party minority rule

Back 119

i.Follows the unilateral conspiracy rule and provides that one guilty mind is enough for conspiracy if the guilty mind believed the other party was actually agreeing to commit the unlawful purpose

ii.Or believes he entered into agreement in the statute

Front 120

with another party Whartons rule

Back 120

if the target crime requires 2 parties then there is no conspiracy to duel unless there are 3 or more parties

Front 121

for unlawful objective

Back 121

a.The goal of the conspiracy must be a
i. Crime or
ii. fraud

Front 122

overt act

Back 122

common law:
- only agreement required
today:
-Require that one of the conspirators perform an overt act in furtherance of the unlawful purpose
ii.Just about anything
1.Buying supplies
2.Planning escape route

Front 123

vicarious liability and conspiracy

Back 123

i.All conspirators are liable for any crime committed by any other conspirator so long as that crime was
1.Reasonably foreseeable and
2.In reasonable furtherance of the conspiracy

Front 124

defenses to conspiracy

Back 124

withdrawal and impossibility

Front 125

withdrawal

Back 125

1. D must timely communicate to all other co-conspirators that the D is no longer a participant in the conspiracy
a. Timely
i. D must communicate intent to withdraw before the target crime occurs
b. Effect
i. Liable for conspiracy even if u withdraw not for the target crime
ii. If a co-conspirator provides a timely withdrawal he will have no liability for any subsequent crimes committed by the other members of the conspiracy
2. Minority rule
a. Withdrawal occurs where co-conspirator tells others and goes to cops in time for cops to catch others
b. Conspirator not liable for conspiracy or target crime!

Front 126

impossibility

Back 126

i. Legal and factual
1. If the d does not succeed in committing the target crime, it may be because the target crime was either legally or factually impossible
2. Legal impossibility is a good defense
a. Exists when the acts d intends to commit are not a crime in the jx
3. Factual impossibility is not

Front 127

does merger apply to conspiracy?

Back 127

no u can be convicted of both conspiracy and target crime

Front 128

accomplice liability parties

Back 128

principal, accomplice and accessory after the fact

Front 129

principal

Back 129

1. One who with intent to commit crime causes crime to occur

Front 130

accomplice

Back 130

1. Anyone with intent crime be committed aids, counsels or encourages principal
a. Silent approval is not sufficient

Front 131

accessory after the fact

Back 131

1. One who with the intent to help a felon escape or avoid arrest or trial receives, relieves or assists a known felon after felony has been completed

Front 132

principal and accomplice liability

Back 132

i. Liable for the crimes the principal committed that the accomplice assisted counseled or encouraged
1. Other crimes
a. Accomplices are also liable for other crimes committed by principal so long as they are foreseeable

Front 133

compared to co-conspirators

Back 133

a. CC only liable for other crimes committed by other conspirators if crime was both foreseeable and in furtherance
b. Here don’t have to show furtherance

Front 134

accessory after the fact liability

Back 134

1. Not liable for crimes committed by the principal but instead for a separate crime of obstructing justice which usually carries a lesser punishment

Front 135

defenses

Back 135

1. insanity
2. intoxication
3. infancy
4. self- defense
5. defense of others
6. duress
7.entrapment
8.mistake of fact
9.mistake of law

Front 136

state of mind

Back 136

general criminal intent, specific criminal intent, strict liability

Front 137

general criminal intent

Back 137

battery, rape and assault

key defense: reasonable mistake of fact

Front 138

specific criminal intent

Back 138

i. Key defenses- reasonable or unreasonable mistake of fact, voluntary intoxication

Front 139

strict liability

Back 139

rare

ii. Must be crime with no mental state required
1. Only defense
a. D performed no voluntary act