Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
80 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Utilitarian Theory of Punishment |
Forward looking, punishes for the betterment of society as a whole |
|
General Deterrence |
Deters others from committing the same crime as defendant. |
|
Specific Deterrence |
Deter defendant from committing the crime again, penalty should be severe enough to outweigh the crime |
|
Retributive Theory of Punishment |
Backward looking, culpability, people should get what they deserve, and when the commit a moral wrong, they should be punished. Intuitive notion. |
|
Positive Retributive Theory |
Culpability is sufficient for punishment (theory of punishment) |
|
Negative Retributive Theory |
Culpability is necessary for punishment, not sufficient |
|
Excessive Punishment |
Protected by the 8th Amendment, punishment doesn't match the crime (can't be put to death for rape) |
|
Cruel and Unusual Punishment |
1. No measurable contribution to the goals of the punishment. 2. It is grossly disproportionate to the crime |
|
Circumstantial Evidence for Conviction |
Conviction may be based on circumstantial evidence alone if circumstances are such that they are inconsistent with reasonable hypothetical of innocence. |
|
Jury Nullification |
Prosecutor has proved beyond a reasonable doubt every fact necessary for conviction, but jury does not convict. Jury ignores the facts and judge's instruction. (doesn't believe it should be a crime, police mistreated defendant, etc.) |
|
Principle for Vagueness |
1. No notice to the ordinary person 2. Arbitrary/ discriminatory enforcement |
|
Expos Facto (Illegal under the Constitution) |
1. Law makes something illegal that was legal when committed 2. Increases the penalties for a crime after committed 3. Changes the rules of evidence to make conviction easier |
|
General Rules of Statutory Interpretation (3) |
1. Plain Meaning 2. Context 3. Legislative History |
|
Statutory Vagueness |
May invalidate a criminal law under Due Process Clause. Too vague and standard less for the general public to understand the conduct it prohibits |
|
Rule if Lenity |
Construe statute in favor of defendant if ambiguous |
|
Acts Reus |
Voluntary affirmative act, conscious exercise of the will. |
|
Omission with a Duty |
SSCCV- Statute, Status relationship (child for parent no status), Contract duty, Created the risk/situation, voluntarily assumed care of another and so secluded the helpless person |
|
Mens Rea |
Mental state, |
|
General Intent |
Any mental state (express OR implied) in the definition of the offenses that relates solely to the conduct and/or the result that constitutes the harm (Usually crimes against persons) |
|
Transferred intent |
Transferring of the mens rea, only transfers the intent of what you actually intended |
|
Specific Intent |
Crime requires the doing of the act with a specific intent or objective. Has 2 mens reas. Look for the word "with." (Usually crimes against property) |
|
MPC Mens rea states of mind |
1. Purposely 2. Knowingly 3. Recklessly 4. Negligently |
|
Purposely |
Conscious objective to engage in certain conduct or cause a certain result |
|
Knowingly |
Practically certain result will happen |
|
Willful Blindness |
Reckless + deliberate action not to find out. (upgrades to KNOWINGLY). MPC uses it, but only some states do. |
|
Recklessly |
Aware of a substantial and unjustified risk that the harm will happen (default MR under MPC) |
|
Negligently |
Out to have been aware of substantial and unjustified risk. Deviates from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise. |
|
Intentionally (CL) translates to... |
Purposefully or Knowingly |
|
Maliciously (CL) translates to... |
Intentionally (Purposely, knowingly), recklessly. Ill-will towards the injured person not required. |
|
Strict Liability |
Exception to the mens rea requirement. Certain defenses unavailable (mistake of fact). Usually minor violations that are necessary for public welfare (speeding ticket). |
|
Mistake of fact in specific intent crime (CL) |
Need good-faith mistake (burning a book, but didn't know it was a book) |
|
Mistake of fact in general intent crime (CL) |
Need good faith AND reasonable mistake (didn't think they were burning a book, but a reasonable person would have known it was a book) |
|
Mistake of fact in MPC |
Elemental Analysis, does the person have the specific intent defined by the definition of the crime (thought they were selling cocaine, but turned out to be table salt, still guilty) |
|
Mistake of Law |
Generally, ignorance of the law is no excuse |
|
CL and MPC exceptions to mistake of law |
1. Statute (that turns out to be untrue) 2. Official Interpretation Opinion 3. Judicial Opinion 4. Administrative proceeding/agency |
|
But-For Test |
Commonly used. But for the defendant's conduct (act OR omission), the harm would not have occurred. Ask if it was necessary. If this is satisfied, don't need to use any other test |
|
Substantial Factor Test |
Rarely used, 2 D's acting independently and not in concert commit 2 separate acts each alone is sufficient to bring about the prohibited consequence |
|
Acceleration Test |
Even if result is inevitable, if defendant's act (can be non-deadly) accelerated the death, can be held liable. **Aggravating a result (causing more pain) is not acceleration |
|
Pre-Emptive Cause |
Another cause preempts or prevents you from achieving your goal and this breaks causation (cause in fact issue). Not guilty, no actus reus. |
|
Proximate Causation |
Victim's injuries must have been the natural and direct cause of the defendant's actions. Direct causal link between the voluntary act and result. |
|
Intervening causes |
Intervening force comes into play after the D's voluntary act and before the harm occurs. (Act of god, 3rd party act). If natural, foreseeable, or direct consequence, D still on the hook. |
|
Superseding Cause |
An intervening cause which breaks the causal chain and and relieves D of responsibility. Look at foreseeability. |
|
Apparent Safety Doctrine |
Superseding cause. When a victim is in apparent safety, and something else happens, is not the direct and natural consequence of the D's act. |
|
Free Deliberate Choice |
Superseding cause. If the intervening cause is a voluntary, informed, free willed human intervening cause, responsibility shifts to the human casing the intervening act |
|
Intended Consequence Doctrine |
Always mention this. A jury will work backwards from the time of death, and will continue looking backward in time until it finds an intention to cause that death, then will stop looking any further back. |
|
1st Degree Murder (CL) |
Intentional (P,K), Deliberate, premeditated killing |
|
Premeditation |
Quantity of time: to think of the matter before it is executed, more than deliberation |
|
Deliberation |
Quality of time. To reflect and make a clear choice to act. Cold and calculated. Normally best for defense attorney to argue was not present.
|
|
2nd Degree Murder (CL) |
Malice aforethought (express or implied), lacks premeditation or deliberation |
|
Express Malice (2nd Degree Murder) |
Intentional (P/K) homicide, lacks premeditation or deliberation |
|
Implied Malice (2nd Degree Murder) |
Abandonment and malignant heart. Reckless + Extreme indifference to human life. |
|
Involuntary Manslaughter |
Reckless only (aware of substantial and unjustified risk). Doesn't need extreme indifference. |
|
Voluntary Manslaughter |
Intentional homicide under adequate provocation (objective), heat of passion (subjective). |
|
Heat of passion in voluntary manslaughter |
Subjective, provocation defense is unavailable to defendant who kills after he has reasonable opportunity for the passion to cool. |
|
Adequate Provocation |
Objective, would it have inflamed the action of a reasonable man? Alternative is 2nd degree murder w/ express malice. In CL, words alone are never alone, in MPC, words alone can be enough. |
|
2 Considerations of Provocation |
1. Gravity of the provocation: reasonable person with same qualities as D (age, race, gay, etc...). Does not include qualities antithetical to American ideals (racist, homophobic, hothead, etc..) 2. Loss of self-control: Age only. Would have reasonable person of same age acted the same? |
|
Negligent Homicide |
Ought to have known that there was a substantial or unjustified risk that would result in death. LESS than reckless. |
|
Felony Murder |
Only in CL, a person is guilty of murder if he kills another person during the commission or attempted commission of any felony. All homicides committed in the furtherance of a felony. |
|
Elements of Felony Murder |
1. Inherently dangerous to human life in the abstract 2. Independent of the felony 3. Two approaches (Agency or Proximate Cause approaches) |
|
Agency Approach (Felony murder) |
Majority Rule 1. Must be an agent of the crime who causes the death 2. The acts of the primary party, are imputed to an accomplice. |
|
Proximate Causation Approach (Felony Murder) |
A felon may be held responsible under the felony-murder rule for a killing committed by a non-felon if the felon set in motion the acts which resulted in the victim's death
|
|
Majority Approach to Rape |
1. Intercourse 2. Non-consensual 3. By force (physical or psychological) OR threat of force (need resistance unless prevented from resisting by threat to safety. Ex: gun to head) |
|
Minority Approach to Rape |
1. Intercourse 2. Non consensual (presumes consent) |
|
Super Minority Approach to Rape |
1. Intercourse 2. Freely given permission (words/actions) Presume no consent. No resistance is necessary |
|
Attempt |
Intent to commit a specific offers. Needs MR and AR, doesn't need causation. |
|
Mens Rea of Attempt |
Purposely. MUST prove that the intent was to successfully commit the crime in question |
|
Preparation vs. Perpetration in Attempt |
Preparation is not an attempt, perpetration is. Not a clear line in between that must be crossed. |
|
AR for Attempt: Last Act |
Completed every step. When D has done everything in his power to commit the crime and events are out of his control (pulling the trigger) |
|
AR for Attempt: Dangerous Proximity Test |
Dangerously close or physically close to the intended victim or to setting in motion a chain of events that created a high probability that the crime would be completed. Look at how physically close and then temporally close. (driving to building, no attempt. In the building, attempt) |
|
AR for Attempt: Unequivocal Test |
Objective Standard: Reasonable person would think the defendant's actions were an attempt. Only look at actions, not words. WI only state to use this. |
|
AR for Attempt: Substantial Step Test (MPC) |
Focuses on what the D only did. Ex: Possession of materials near crime for no other purpose, lying in wait, possession of specially designed materials for commission of crime. Up to a jury to decide. Criminal intent must be corroborated. |
|
Retributive reasoning for punishing attempt |
Defendant still culpable for take steps to carry out harm |
|
Utilitarian reasoning for punching attempt |
Specific deterrence: if someone attempts, may try again General deterrence: prevent others from executing these kinds of thoughts/taking action |
|
AR Tests for Attempt |
1. Last Act Test 2. Dangerous Proximity Test 3. Unequivocal Test 4. Substantial Step Test (MPC) |
|
To Defenses for Attempt |
1. Impossibility Defense 2. Abandonment of Attempt |
|
Impossibility Defense (Attempt) |
Pure legal impossibility, what he thinks is a crime, is not a crime at all. |
|
Abandonment of Attempt |
1. Voluntary 2. Complete NOTE: can't abandon last act is done |
|
Conspiracy |
A partnership in criminal purposes, a mutual agreement or understanding (express or implied), between two or more persons to commit a criminal act or to accomplish a legal act by unlawful means |
|
Mens Rea in Conspiracy |
Specifically intend to agree to agree to commit the crime (Purposely) PLUS 1. Direct Evidence 2. Special Interests (Stake in business, only used for illegal ends, volume is disproportionate) 3. Aggravated Nature of the crime |
|
Actus Reas for Conspiracy |
Agreement (either express or implied) PLUS an overt act (anything that any of the conspirators do) |