Crim Law Just Crimes

Front 1

What is Murder?

Back 1

"The killing of any person with malice aforethought, either express or impled."

Front 2

Proving Malice

Back 2

a. Any intentional (that is, purposeful or knowing) killing other than voluntary manslaughter (for example, a purposeful killing done while unreasonably in the heat of passion); or

b. Intentionally (that is, purposeful or knowingly) causing serious bodily injury but where death, though never intended, results; or

c. Felony murder; or

d. Depraved heart (or abandoned and malignant heart) murder (a special kind of extremely reckless killing that exhibits indifference to the value of human life).

Front 3

Voluntary Manslaughter Definition

Back 3

a. A killing that would otherwise be murder but that is mitigated to manslaughter because it was done upon being reasonably provoked into a sudden heat of passion without cooling off where a reasonable person would not have cooled off.

Front 4

Voluntary Manslaughter Elements

Back 4

1. mental state that would ordinarily qualify as murder (for example, a purposeful killing);

2. when the defendant has been provoked by the victim into the heat of passion;

3. a reasonable person would have been so provoked;

4. the defendant has not cooled off by the time of the killing; and

5. a reasonable person would not have cooled off.

Front 5

Elements of Actus Reus

Back 5

Volitional, Physical Act or Omission if under obligation to act

D must perform a voluntary, physical act.
Requires affirmative, voluntary act. Physical act.
Intention alone is insufficient if no evidence of act putting intent into effect.

Front 6

Actus Reus – Omission Liability

Back 6

Legal Duty to Act created by:

SCRAP

S- Statute requiring duty

C - Contractual obligation

R - Special Relationship – i.e. children, certain family members

A - Assumed obligation. As if you started to save someone, but backed off. Or just indicated you would take care of them.

P - Peril. If you created the peril (wrongful creation of Peril)

Front 7

What is "Knowingly" Mens Rea?

Back 7

Knowingly - Aware of attendant circumstances; and practically certain conduct will cause a result

Aware his conductis of that nature or that attendant circumstances exist
and of the Result - practically certain his conduct will cause that result

Front 8

When is there Actus Reus by Omission?

Back 8

There are five situations in which an omission breaches a legal duty of care to another:

S - Statute imposes duty of care
C - Contract
R - Relationship
A - Assumed duty of Care
P - Peril, you created it.

Front 9

What would not constitute Actus Reus?

Back 9

Any non-voluntary action:
• Reflex or convulsion
• Bodily movement during unconsciousness (non-self-induced) or sleep
• Conduct during hypnosis
• Movement that is otherwise not the product of effort of the actor

Front 10

Which are the Specific Intent Crimes?

Back 10

BAM ACTS = specific intent crimes
D must have a specific intent or objective to commit the given crime.

B - Burglary
A - ASSAULT
M- 1st degree Murder (1st degree in MPC states; malice aforethought different)

A- Attempt
C - Conspiracy
T - Theft / Larceny
S - Solicitation

Solicitation, Conspiracy, Attempt (Inchoate Crimes).
First Degree Murder
Larceny
Embezzlement
False Pretenses
Robbery
Burglary
Forgery

Specific intent must always be proven, never inferred.
Mistake of fact and voluntary intoxication are available defenses to ALL of the above specific intent crimes

Front 11

Which are the Malice Crimes?

Back 11

Murder and Arson

Murder (murder always means common law murder!)
Arson

D acts with reckless disregard or undertakes an obvious risk, from which a harmful result is expected

Front 12

Which are the General Intent Crimes

Back 12

Everything else - i.e. Battery, Rape, etc

D must be aware of his actions and any attendant circumstances.
-May be inferred from the act itself
-Most crimes are general intent crimes

Front 13

Which are the no intent crimes?

Back 13

Strict Liability Offenses
No intent or wareness is required for strict liability crimes
Arises with administrative, regulatory or morality crimes

Front 14

Unconstitutionally vague

Back 14

upon examining the statute, a person of ordinary intelligence would not understand what he is required to do.

D must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that statute was so unclear could not reasonably understand that it prohibited his acts

Front 15

How can you tell if recklessness rises to the level of Depraved Heart?

Back 15

The killing was done under circumstances showing a realization of the imminence of danger and a concious disregard of that danger.
Thus, manifesting extreme indifference to human life.

Factors persuasive of an indifference to human life include:
• Intoxication
• Speeding
• Near or nonfatal collisions shortly before the fatal accident
• Driving on the wrong side of the road
• Failure to aid the victim
• Failure to heed traffic signs
• Failure to heed warnings about reckless driving
• Prior record of driving offenses (DUI, reckless driving, or both)

Front 16

Mens Rea for Murder

Back 16

Malice aforethought
Malice aforethought - Had the mental state of malice at the time the fatal blow is struck. *Can exist in the twinkling of an eye*
1.intent to kill or

2. inflict great bodily harm

3. extreme recklessness that shows disregard for human life
4.intent to commit an inherently dangerous felony (i.e. tax fraud - no, but smuggling people across border- yes). Reasonably forseeable violence.

Malice is a lower Standard than these from Degree States
Willful
Premeditation
Deliberation

Front 17

Murder

Back 17

Murder is the killing of any person with malice aforethought, either express or implied
– S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-10

Murder always means common law murder ...unless otherwise stated

Front 18

Proving Malice

Back 18

1. *Any* Purposeful or Knowing killing other than voluntary manslaughter (i.e. not in the heat of passion)

2. Intentionally causing serious bodily injury, but death, though never intended, results

3. Felony Murder (killing after intending to committ inherently dangerous felony)- OR

4. Depraved Heart -extremely reckless killing that exhibits indifference to the value of human life

Front 19

Depraved Heart definition

Back 19

Depraved Heart -extremely reckless killing that exhibits indifference to the value of human life

sometimes called abandoned heart or malignant heart

Factors persuasive of an indifference to human life include:
• Intoxication
• Speeding
• Near or nonfatal collisions shortly before the fatal accident
• Driving on the wrong side of the road
• Failure to aid the victim
• Failure to heed traffic signs
• Failure to heed warnings about reckless driving
• Prior record of driving offenses (DUI, reckless driving, or both)

Front 20

Voluntary Manslaughter

Back 20

Imperfect Self- Defense OR

A knowing or purposeful killing committed in the heat of passion, reasonably provoked, no cool off time and a reasonable person would not have cooled off

A killing that would otherwise be murder but that is mitigated to manslaughter because it was done upon being reasonably provoked into a sudden heat of passion without cooling off where a reasonable person would not have cooled off. Its elements, therefore, are:

Mental state is Purposeful or Knowing (Mental state that would ordinarily qualify as murder)

Defendant was *provoked* by the victim into the heat of passion

A *Reasonable Person* would have been so provoked

Defendant had not cooled off by the time of the killing; AND

A reasonable person would not have cooled off

Front 21

Involuntary Manslaughter

Back 21

Reckless killing, criminial negligence, tort negligence or misdameanor manslaughter

Misdameanor Manslaughter
OR
in some jurisdictions, *a reckless killing* that doesn't rise to the level of Depraved heart

in other jurisdictions, a criminally negligent killing; and, in still other jurisdictions, a killing done with ordinary tort negligence; or

Front 22

Provocation - what is sufficient to constitute provocation?

Back 22

"Mere words" are insufficient …unless they're revealing information sufficient to provoke heat of passion. i.e. not insults, but "he's not your son/I had an affair."

some jurisdictions require an act - not just words.

Front 23

Is a crime premeditated? (murder)

Back 23

Premeditation means that the defendant intended to kill another human being (knowingly standard), and that after forming that intent (knowledge), reflected on the decision before killing.
This reflection (which may occur within the twinkling of an eye) is what distinguishes first degree murder from second degree murder.

An act is NOT done with premeditation if it is the instant effect of a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.

Reminder: Malice aforethought - Had the mental state of malice at the time the fatal blow is struck. *Can exist in the twinkling of an eye*
1.intent to kill or
2. inflict great bodily harm
3. extreme recklessness that shows disregard for human life
4.intent to commit an inherently dangerous felony (i.e. tax fraud - no, but smuggling people across border- yes). Reasonably forseeable violence.


Alternative: passage of time ..
Premeditation means that the defendant acts with either the intention or the knowledge that he will kill another human being

when such intention or knowledge preceeds the killing by any length of time to permit reflection. Proof of ACTUAL reflection is not requied, but an act is not done with premeditation if it is the instant effect of a suddent quarrel or heat of passion.

Front 24

Serious bodily injury

Back 24

Bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious, permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss of impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ

Front 25

What would a Def claim to reduce murder to Voluntary Manslaughter? To Involuntary Manslaughter?

Back 25

No intent to kill -- Not done purposefully or knowingly …therefore no malice
No premeditation …therefore no malice ….therefore involuntary

Provoked - reasonably - had not cooled down - reasonable not to have cooled down …. therefore manslaughter

Front 26

How do you distinguish between Willful, Deliberate and Premeditated? When would you make that disctinction?

Back 26

In a degree murder state.
Willfullness is the intent to kill

Deliberation is the process of determinig upon a course of action to kill as a result of thought

Premeditation is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill. It is a design, a determination to kill, distinctly formed in the mind by the time of the killing

Front 27

Larceny

Back 27

1) Trespassory (unlawful) taking and carrying away of

2) Someone else's property

3) Without the consent of the owner and with

4) The intent to deprive the owner of the property permanently

note: includes finding lost property with knowledge/means of discovering ownership, but not doing so.

Front 28

Larceny by Trick

Back 28

Taking possession by fraud

1) unlawful taking (by Fraud) and carrying away of

2) Someone else's property

3) Without the consent of the owner and with

4) The intent to deprive the owner of the property permanently

note: includes finding lost property with knowledge/means of discovering ownership, but not doing so.

What does possession entail? Exercise of dominion and control over the object with intent to possess

Front 29

Carjacking

Back 29

Felonious taking of a motor vehicle in the possession of another, from his/her immediate presence, against their will

With intent to either permanently or temporarily deprive person of possession of motor vehicle

Taking – offender secures dominion over a property

Carrying away – any slight movement away of the property

Front 30

What is a taking in common law?

Back 30

secures dominion over the property

Front 31

What is Negligence?

Back 31

Failed in duty of care - criminal negligence has a higher showing

MPC term

Front 32

What is Recklessness?

Back 32

Conciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result will occur or that a circumstance exists

Front 33

Will conditional intent be sufficient mens rea in a car jacking case?

Back 33

Yes - if a threat of death occurs in carjacking, that's enough for attempted murder mens rea.

When the intent necessary to commit a crime is only formed based on an alternative scenario (e.g., intent to kill in carjacking only if victim does not turn over car) the Supreme Court has held that the intent has been satisfied even if it is not the preferred objective of the offender. In other words, a Δ may not negate a proscribed intent by requiring the victim to comply with a condition the Δ has no right to impose; an intent to do an act in the alternative is nevertheless an intent to do the act.

Front 34

What is Voluntary Manslaughter?

Back 34

Killing of any person with malice aforethought, either express or implied ... but

was done in the heat of passion

after being reasonably provoked

without a reasonable cooling off period

Provoked (objective) - Reasonable person would have been provoked. Not mere words/insults, but maybe new information.

Reasonable Cooling off period (objective) - did the person actually cool off by the time of the killing? Would a reasonable person have cooled off by time of killing?

Front 35

What is Robbery?

Back 35

Larceny + Assault

Caption + Asportation + Assault

Larceny from person by force or fear

The unlawful taking and carrying away

of the personal property of another

with the intent to permenantly depriving him/her of that property

...achieved by force or fear

possession - exercise of dominion and control with the intent to posess

Front 36

What is Assault?

Back 36

Assault = attempted battery or creating apprehension (fear) of battery

Attempted Battery (unlawful touching of another person, resulting in an offensive touching or bodily injury). In some jurisdictions, does not need to be intentional.

OR

Intentional creation of immminent apprehension of battery

Aggravated assault is when more serious crime, like murder or rape, is part of the assault.

Assault merges with the completed crime

Front 37

What is Conspiracy?

Back 37

Agreement between two or more people to committ a crime (to pursue an unlawful objective); PLUS some act in furtherance of the crime

may be preparation

tacit agreement inferred from conduct

Bilateral Theory (common law) - at least two guilty persons required

UniLateral Theory (MPC and Modern) - one guilty person and one faker ok.

WHARTON'S RULE: need 1 more person than required to commit the crime, in order to have conspiracy to commit.

Each is liable for FORSEEABLE crimes in furtherance of their objective(s)

Front 38

What is Battery?

Back 38

Unlawful touching of another person, resulting in an offensive touching or bodily injury

Unlawful application of force to the person of another, resulting in either bodily injury or offensive touching

Front 39

For which crimes is a conspirator liable?

Back 39

Each is liable for FORSEEABLE crimes in furtherance of their objective(s)

Front 40

ARSON - what is Arson??

Back 40

Malicious

burning

of the dwelling house

of another

Modern: Purposeful burning of a structure

Front 41

What is Embezzlement?

Back 41

Possession of property obtained lawfully

Owner gives possession of the property based on trust and confidence relationship

Defendant fraudulently or unlawfully conversts owner's entrusted property for his/her own use

Front 42

What are False Pretenses?

Back 42

Obtaining Title By Fraud

Front 43

What is Common Law Robbery?

Model Penal Code Robbery?

Back 43

Breaking and Entering

of the dwelling house of another

at nighttime

with the intent to commit a felony therein

MPC:

entering any structure with intent to committ felony or theft inside

(sometimes extends to vehicles)

Front 44

What is Receiving Stolen Property?

Back 44

Receive

Retain

or Dispose of Another Person's Property

Knowing or Having reasonable cause to Believe

that the property has been obtained through commision of a Theft offense

Front 45

What is Attempt?

Back 45

An overt act coupled with specific intent to commit a crime .... a substantial step beyond "mere preparation." (MPC)

Defenses:

legal impossibility

abandonment (in some jurisdictions)

Modern Penal Code:

Purposely engages in criminal conduct

Act constituting a SUBSTANTIAL STEP toward commission of crime

Front 46

What is Solicitation?

Back 46

Encouraging, aiding, abetting or ordering another person to commit a crime with the intent that the other person commit that crime

Crime of solicitation is over with the asking

Defenses:

Legal impossibility

Withdrawl or renunciation in some jurisdictions

Factual impossibility is not a defense to Solicitation!

Front 47

Under MPC, what are examples of a taking a substantial step toward a commission of a crime, and when do those steps become important?

Back 47

When examining whether we have Criminal Attempt under the MPC.

Key factors:

• Lying in Wait
• Enticing Victim
• Reconnoitering Site of the Crime
• Possessing unlawful materials
• Soliciting Innocent Agent

Front 48

What are the 3 types of Attempt?

Back 48

• Probable Distance Approach – Must pass the point whether most men with the same intention, would think better of their conduct and desist. (ATTEMPT)

• Equivocality Approach – Take a step toward the commission of the crime. It’s the Res Ipsa Loquitor test (ATTEMPT)

• The Modern Penal Code approach. Substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime. (ATTEMPT)

• Substantial Step test (in a question) – usually will mean modern penal code should be followed. (ATTEMPT)

Front 49

Can you be charged with attempted Depraved Heart murder?

For attempt of anything negilgent or reckless?

Back 49

No. Recklessness and Negligence are not specific intent crimes. they're general intent...

can't attempt to involuntarily manslaughter

Front 50

What is Accomplice Liability? What types of accomplices are there?

Back 50

Accomplices are those d and abetaiin a crime...with intent that the crime be committed

P1- Principal in the first degree. Committed act.

P2 - Present at time and scene of the crime. i.e. wheelman who doesn't pull trigger.

Acessory before the fact

Accessory after the fact

They did conspire and agree = conspiracy

aided and abetted = acessory

Front 51

What is the Test for “Possession”

Back 51

Dominion and Control.

• Actual Possession – Have it in your physical possession and control.

• Constructive Possession - Dominion and Control. Both of you have access, dominion and control.

Front 52

What defines the line between INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE v. POSSESSION

Back 52

1. the quantity of drugs in a D’s possession

2. Purity of the drugs at issue

3. The quantity of cash on a defendant

4. The manner in which the drugs were packaged

5. The presence of drug paraphernalia

6. The lack of any evidence showing a defendant used or consumed the type of drug seized

7. The presence of firearms

8. A D’s history of participation in drug distribution

9. A combination of the above

Front 53

What is the line between reckless and negligence?

Back 53

Reckless - aware of the risk created. “substantial and unjustifiable” risk. Consciously disregarded.

Negligence - Failed to perceive the risk the actor created.

Negligence - gross deviation from the standard of care

Front 54

What is Purposely?

Back 54

Mens Rea in Modern Penal Code, the most serious Mens Rea.

1. Purposely --- “consciously desires that result, whatever the likelihood of that result happening from his conduct.” (US Gypsum) it was your Conscious Objective (to create the prohibited act/crime). Is aware of the attendant circumstances or believes/hopes the attendant circumstances exist.

Front 55

What is Negligently?

Back 55

MPC Mens Rea.
SHOULD be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists of will result from his conduct. Failed to perceive the risk the actor created.

Aggravated assault – “a person who purposely caused serious bodily injury to another.”

Front 56

What is Knowingly?

Back 56

2. Knowingly – Subjective, actual awareness of fact or circumstance. “The result is practically certain to follow from his conduct, whatever his desire may be as to that result.” (US Gypsum) Acted under circumstances where he was practically certain his conduct would result in (the prohibited act/crime).
Not “should have known/could have known/reasonably should have known”
The same as WILLFULLY in Statutes.

Front 57

Which Mens Rea in MPC is equivalent to statutory Willfully?

Back 57

Knowingly = Willfully in runaway train case (Youts - kid sends train roaring down the tracks).

Could mean "acts done with knowledge" that it will bring somethign about as a practically certain result.

Front 58

What do you need to show to prove Recklessness?

Back 58

A gross deviation from the standard of care.

conciously disregards an unjustifiable risk

that a result will occur or that a circumstance exists

Front 59

Burglary

Back 59

Breaking and entering the dwelling house of another at nighttime with the intent to commit a felony therein

1.Breaking and Entering (actus reus)
2. of the dwelling house of another (attendant circ)
3. At nighttime (att circ)
4. with the intent to commit a felony therein (mens rea/intent)

Front 60

Arson

Back 60

i. The malicious
ii. Burning (not water damage, smoke or explosion)
iii. Of the dwelling
iv. Of another

Front 61

False Pretenses

Back 61

i. Obtaining title;
ii. To personal property of another;
iii. By intentional false statement of past or existing fact
iv. With intent to defraud by the other.

Front 62

Embezzlement

Back 62

i. The fraudulent
ii. Conversion (i.e. dealing w/ the property in a manner inconsistent w/ the arrangement by which D has possession)
iii. Of personal property
iv. Of another
v. By a person in lawful possession of that property
vi. With intent to defraud

Front 63

Rape

Back 63

Unlawful intercourse of a woman by a man,
not her husband,
without her effective consent.

Note: slightest penetration completes the crime of rape. Lack of effective consent:
--i. Intercourse is accomplished by actual force
--ii. Intercourse is accomplished by threats of great and immediate bodily harm
--iii. The victim is incapable of consenting due to unconsciousness, intoxication, or mental cond.

b. Statutory rape: intercourse with a female under the age of consent; it is not necessary to show lack of consent. Reasonable mistake as to age is irrelevant. This is a strict liability crime.

Front 64

Temporary Safety rule in Felony Murder

Back 64

Where D reaches a point of temporary safety, any subsequent deaths ≠ felony murder.

But deaths occurring during D’s immediate flight = felony murder

Front 65

Under Common Law, can you have a one person conspiracy?

Back 65

No! Common Law = bilateral theory. Requires two people in conspiracy.

Both must be convicted in common law

Front 66

Embezzlement

Back 66

i. The fraudulent

ii. Conversion (i.e. dealing w/ the property in a manner inconsistent w/ the arrangement by which D has possession)

iii. Of personal property

iv. Of another

v. By a person in lawful possession of that property

vi. With intent to defraud

Front 67

Embezzlement

Back 67

i. The fraudulent

ii. Conversion (i.e. dealing w/ the property in a manner inconsistent w/ the arrangement by which D has possession)

iii. Of personal property

iv. Of another

v. By a person in lawful possession of that property

vi. With intent to defraud

Front 68

Merger - when does it happen?

Back 68

Merger
a. Generally, there is no merger. You can be convicted of more than one crime from a single act.

b. But, there is merger for #solicitation# and #attempt#. That is, solicitation and attempt merge into the substantive offense. Thus, actually committing the crime is a complete defense to attempt.

c. Note: conspiracy does NOT merge with the substantive offensive. So you can be convicted of conspiracy to rob and robbery.