Reading...
Play button
Play button
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;
116 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Criminal law jursidiction is territorial and so may be prosecuted where?
|
In any state where an act that was part of the crime took place or in any state where the result took place.
|
|
|
The prosecution must disprove each element of a defense by what standards, with what exception?
|
Beyond a reasonable doubt, except for insanity in the majority approach, under which D must usually prove by a preponderance.
|
|
|
A crime requires an act; an act is a voluntary movement. Three examples of movements that are not acts:
|
sleepwalking/unconscious movements; reflex or convulsion; someone else moves you
|
|
|
Three requirements for a failure to act to create criminal liability:
|
legal duty to act; knowledge of facts giving rise to the duty and the ability to help
|
|
|
Five ways a legal duty to act can be created:
|
by statute (ex, filing tax return); by contract (ex, babysitter); by status relationship (only two ex: parent-child, spouse-spouse); by voluntary assumption of care; by creation of the peril
|
|
|
Requirements to establish "possession" for the criminal act of possession of contraband:
|
1. control for a period of time long enough to have an 2. opportunity to terminate the possession
|
|
|
The contraband need not be in the D's actual possession, so long as he has constructive possession, defined as:
|
close enough for him to exercise dominion and control over it.
|
|
|
The four common law mental states and their definitions
|
specific intent (when the crime requires not just he desire to do the act, but also the desire to achieve a specific result); malice (when a defendant acts intentionally or with a reckless disregard for an obvious or known risk); general intent (a defendant need only be generally aware of the factors constituting the crime and need not intend a specific result); strict liability (when the crime requires only doing the act; no mental state needed)
|
|
|
The 11 specific intent crimes at common law.
|
assault; 1st degree premeditated murder; larceny; embezzlement; false pretenses; burglary; robbery; forgery; solicitation; conspiracy; attempt
|
|
|
Two common law malice crimes
|
murder and arson
|
|
|
Four examples of general intent crimes at common law
|
battery, forcible rape, false imprisonment and kidnapping
|
|
|
Examples of strict liability crimes - the two varieties and examples of the first
|
1) Public welfare offenses (regulatory or morality offenses that typically carry small penalties; ex, selling alcohol to a minor; selling contaminated food; corrupting morals of a minor); 2) Statutory rape
|
|
|
Mistake of fact is a defense... (if reasonable, and if unreasonable)
|
if reasonable, to any crime except a crime of strict liability; if unreasonable, only to specific intent crimes
|
|
|
A mistake of law is not a defense except...
|
if a statute specifically makes knowledge of the law an element of the crime (ex, selling a gun to a known felon, and mistakenly thinking robbery is a misdemeanor)
|
|
|
The five Model Penal Code mental states and their definitions
|
Purposely (when it is the defendant's conscious intent to accomplish a specific result, what the D meant to do); Knowingly (when the D is aware of what he is doing); Recklessly (when the D is aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and consciously disregards the risk); Negligently (when the D should have known about a substantial and unjustifiable risk); Strict Liability (no mental state, similar to common law)
|
|
|
Under the MPC, a mistake of fact is a defense if ...
|
the mistake of fact negates the requisite mental state.
An unreasonable mistake of fact is a defense to crimes requiring purpose, knowledge, or recklessness; only a reasonable mistake is a defense to negligence; mistake of fact not a defense for strict liability crimes. |
|
|
Under the MPC, a mistake of law...
|
Is not a defense.
|
|
|
A defendant is an actual cause if the bad result would not have happened but for the D's conduct. A D is a proximate cause if...
What is proximate cause focused on (concepts)? |
the bad result is a natural and probable consequence of the D's conduct.
Proximate cause is about foreseeability and fairness. |
|
|
If a D's acts accelerate a bad result, the D is or is not an actual cause?
|
The D is an actual cause - an accelerating cause is an actual cause.
|
|
|
The rule of "eggshell victims" - D is proximate cause even if ...
|
V's preexisting weakness contributed to the bad result - take your victim as you find him.
|
|
|
A D is not the proximate cause if there is an intervening cause and...
|
the intervening cause is an unforeseeable intervening event that causes the bad result.
|
|
|
What intervening cause is always foreseeable?
|
Ordinary medical malpractice.
|
|
|
State the concurrence rule and where it commonly arises.
|
the D must have the mental state at the same time as he engages in the act; arises in larceny and burglary cases.
|
|
|
Common law definition of battery and its mental state
|
the unlawful application of force to another resulting in either bodily injury or offensive touching
mental state: general intent |
|
|
Common law definition of assault and its mental state
|
An attempted battery OR the intentional creation other than by mere words of a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the victim of an imminent bodily harm
mental state: specific intent |
|
|
The modern statutory defense of aggravated assault and battery
|
An assault or battery is considered more serious: if a) a weapon is used; b) the victim is a child; or c) the intent is to commit a robbery or rape.
|
|
|
Death must occur within how long o the D's act under the common law and MPC approach for the act to be punishable as homicide.
|
Under common law, the death must occur within a year and a day of the homicidal act.
Under MPC, death may occur at any time. |
|
|
Common law definition of murder, its mental state, and the definition of the mental state (four possible things).
|
Causing the death of another person with malice aforethought.
Malice aforethought means: 1) intent to kill; 2) the intent to inflict great bodily harm; 3) extreme recklessness; OR 4) felony murder. |
|
|
Intent to kill can be inferred from the intentional use of what?
|
Deadly weapon.
|
|
|
State the transferred intent rule.
|
If a D intends to harm one V, but accidentally harms another V, the D's intent will transfer from intended V to actual V.
|
|
|
The exception to transferred intent rule - it does not apply to what kind of crime.
|
Attempts - transferred intent only applies to completed crimes.
|
|
|
D shoots at A, attempting to kill him, but instead wounds V. D is guilty of...
D is not guilty of... |
attempting to kill A, but only of battery, reckless endangerment against V
attempted murder of V. |
|
|
Common statutory modification of homicide to create two degrees - define first degree and second degree murder.
|
First degree: any killing committed with premeditation and deliberation.
Second degree: all other murders, EXCEPT felony murder is usually 1st degree, especially if it involves an enumerated, dangerous felony. |
|
|
Common law voluntary manslaughter definition:
|
An intentional killing committed in the heat of passion after adequate provocation.
|
|
|
Two main components of adequate provocation for voluntary manslaughter:
|
1. provocation that would arouse a sudden and intense passion in the mind of an ordinary person and
2. the defendant did not have time to cool off |
|
|
Examples of adequate provocation for common law voluntary manslaughter.
|
1. serious assualt and battery
2. finding spouse in bed with another 3. BUT NOT words alone (at least some states) |
|
|
Definition of common law involuntary manslaughter
|
A killing committed with criminal negligence or a killing committed during a crime if it was not felony murder (aka, misdemeanor manslaughter).
|
|
|
Definition of common law felony murder.
|
Any killing caused during the commission of or attempt to commit a felony.
|
|
|
Seven limits on felony murder.
|
1. D must be guilty of underlying felony.
2. felony must be inherently dangerous 3. felony must be separate from killing itself (merger rule / independent felonious purpose rule) 4. killing must be during the felony or during immediate flight 5. the homicidal act must be in furtherance of the felony 6. the death must be foreseeable (proximate causation applies) 7. the victim must not be a co-felon |
|
|
State the rule of vicarious liability as to felony murder
|
If a co-felon causes a death, all of the other co-felons will be guilty of felony murder. This applies even if actual killing was committed by a 3rd person (V or rescuer) so long as one of the felons is a proximate cause of the death.
|
|
|
MPC forms of murder, by mental state.
|
1. intent to kill - purpose and knowledge (premeditation and deliberation is irrelevant under MPC)
2. extreme recklessness 3. felony murder - limited to six underlying felonies - burglary, robbery, arson, kidnapping, escape and sexual assault |
|
|
MPC forms of manslaughter.
|
1. Intentional - intentional killing committed under the influence of a reasonable extreme emotional disturbance.
2. Unintentional - reckless killing, which means the defendant is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death. |
|
|
MPC definition of criminally negligent homicide and mental state.
|
The defendant should have known about a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death.
Mental state - negligence |
|
|
Definition of false imprisonment and mental state
|
The unlawful confinement of a person without his consent; general intent.
|
|
|
Definition of kidnapping and mental state.
|
False imprisonment that involves either moving the victim or concealing the victim in a secret place; general intent.
|
|
|
MPC forms of murder, by mental state.
|
1. intent to kill - purpose and knowledge (premeditation and deliberation is irrelevant under MPC)
2. extreme recklessness 3. felony murder - limited to six underlying felonies - burglary, robbery, arson, kidnapping, escape and sexual assault |
|
|
MPC forms of manslaughter.
|
1. Intentional - intentional killing committed under the influence of a reasonable extreme emotional disturbance.
2. Unintentional - reckless killing, which means the defendant is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death. |
|
|
MPC definition of criminally negligent homicide and mental state.
|
The defendant should have known about a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death.
Mental state - negligence |
|
|
Definition of false imprisonment and mental state
|
The unlawful confinement of a person without his consent; general intent.
|
|
|
Definition of kidnapping and mental state.
|
False imprisonment that involves either moving the victim or concealing the victim in a secret place; general intent.
|
|
|
Definition aggravated kidnapping
|
Where a kidnapping involves: the purpose to collect ransom; the purpose to commit a robbery or rape; or the victim is a child
|
|
|
Definition and intent for forcible rape
|
Sex w/o the V's consent accomplished by force, threat of force, or when V is unconscious. General intent.
|
|
|
Definition and intent for statutory rape.
MPC exception. |
Sex w/someone under the age of consent. Strict liability.
MPC: allows reasonable mistake of age to be a defense. |
|
|
Common law larceny definition, requirements and intent.
|
The trespassory taking and carrying away of the personal property of another with the intent to steal.
Property must be moved. If D validly possesses, c/n be guilty of larceny; D can be guilty for taking own property if someone else has valid possession. Specific intent crime. |
|
|
Erroneous takings rule.
|
A taking under a claim of right is never a larceny.
|
|
|
Continuing trespass rule.
|
If D wrongfully takes property, but w/o intent to steal, not guilty of larceny. But if D later forms intent to steal, initial trespassory taking is considered to have continued, and D is guilty of larceny.
|
|
|
Definition and mental state for embezzlement.
|
Conversion of personal property of another by a person already in lawful possession of that property, w/intent to defraud. Specific intent crime.
|
|
|
Difference b/w embezzlement and larceny.
|
For larceny, D cannot have lawful possession; for embezzlement, D must have lawful possession of the property.
|
|
|
difference between custody and possession
|
Possession is more than custody, and requires the authority to exercise some discretion over the property.
|
|
|
Definition of false pretenses.
|
Obtaining title to the personal property of another by an intentional false statement, with the intent to defraud.
|
|
|
Difference between larceny and false pretenses.
|
In larceny, the D gets only possession; in false pretenses, D gets title.
|
|
|
Requirements for false statement that satisfies false pretenses.
|
must be of past or present event - not a future promise
|
|
|
Definition of larceny by trick
|
If D obtains only possession as a result of the intentional false statement, the crime is larceny by trick, not false pretenses.
|
|
|
Definition of robbery and mental state
|
A larceny from another's person or presence by force or threat of immediate injury.
Mental state - specific intent to steal |
|
|
Definitions of presence and force for robbery
|
presence includes V's vicinity or from V's house while V is in it
force is that sufficient to overcome resistance |
|
|
The requisite kind of threat needed for:
Robbery Extortion Blackmail |
-robbery - immediate injury
-extortion - future injury -blackmail - embarrasment |
|
|
Definition of receipt of stolen property
|
Receiving possession of stolen property with knowledge that it was stolen
|
|
|
Definition of forgery
|
Making or altering a writing so that it is false with intent to defraud
|
|
|
Definition of uttering
|
offering as genuine a forged instrument with intent to defraud
|
|
|
Definition of malicious mischief
|
Destroying or damaging someone else's property with malice
|
|
|
Definition of common law burglary and intent.
|
Breaking and entering the dwelling of another at night with the intent to commit a felony inside.
Specific intent to commit a felony inside. |
|
|
Definition of breaking for purposes of common law burglary, eliminated by modern statutory changes.
|
Creating or enlarging an opening by at least minimal force - d/n include climbing thru already open window, or entering w/permission.
|
|
|
Definition of common law arson.
|
The malicious burning of a building - mental intent is malice; burning requires material wasting of the structure.
|
|
|
Two statutory developments to arson.
|
1) used to be limited to a dwelling, now extended to all buildings by most states; 2) used to not be able to commit vs own property, now can
|
|
|
Definition of Principal
|
person who commits the crime
|
|
|
Definition of accomplice
|
Person who aids or encourages the principal; mental state, with the intent that the crime be committed
|
|
|
The accomplice is guilty of...
|
1. all crimes he aided or encouraged (just as if he did them) and
2. all other foreseeable crimes committed along with the aided crime |
|
|
If the principal is not prosecuted or has an individual defense, the accomplice is ...
|
still guilty
|
|
|
Persons who are not accomplices (three):
|
1. mere presence d/n make an accomplice - must actually help
2. mere knowledge d/n make someone an accomplice - must actually intend to aid or encourage 3. members of protected class - victim of the crime c/n be an accomplice |
|
|
Requirements for an encourager-accomplice to withdraw:
|
by discouraging the crime before it is committed
|
|
|
Requirement for aider-accomplice to withdraw:
|
must either neutralize the assistance or prevent crime from happening (including notifying authorities)
|
|
|
Definition of accessory after the fact (at common law; modernly called obstruction of justice, harboring fugitive or hindering prosecution):
|
D must help a principal who has already committed a felony w/knowledge that the crime has been committed and with the intent to help the principal avoid arrest or conviction
|
|
|
The three inchoate offenses
|
solicitation, conspiracy and attempt
|
|
|
Definition and mental state for solicitation
|
Asking someone to commit a crime, with the intent that the crime be committed - completion unnecessary, crime is in the asking; specific intent mental state
|
|
|
Definition and mental state for conspiracy
|
An agreement b/w two or more people to commit a crime, plus an overt act in furtherance of the crime
-majority of states now require overt act - common law trad'lly d/n require -completion unnecessary - crime is in the planning |
|
|
Is more than one D needed to form a conspiracy at common law and MPC?
|
Under common law, need at least two guilty minds, both of whom actually agree to accomplish the conspiracy's objectives - if all other parties acquitted, last remaining D c/n be convicted.
Under MPC, D may be guilty of conspiracy even if the other parties are acquitted or were just pretending to agree. |
|
|
Vicarious liability rule for conspiracy.
|
D liable for other crimes committed by his co-conspirators, so long as those crimes were in furtherance of the conspiracy's objectives and were foreseeable.
|
|
|
Common law definition of attempt.
|
conduct that gets dangerously close to the commission of the crime - dangerous proximity test - w/the specific intent to commit the crime.
|
|
|
MPC/majority definition of attempt
|
Conduct that is a substantial step towards the crime and strongly corroborative of a criminal purpose, with the specific intent to commit the crime.
|
|
|
The rule regarding attempt of unintentional crimes...
|
You cannot attempt unintentional crimes - no attempt versions of reckless or negligent crimes or felony murder.
Can attempt malice, general intent or strict liability crimes, but only if D specifically intends to commit the crime - ex, can recklessly commit arson, but only guilty of attempted arson if specifically intend to burn down the building. |
|
|
Defense of factual impossibility.
|
The claim that it was impossible to complete the crime b/c of some circumstance beyond the D's control - NOT a defense to attempt
|
|
|
Defense of legal impossibility.
|
The claim that it was impossible to compete the crime b/c what the D was trying to do was not illegal - IS a defense to attempt
|
|
|
Withdrawal/renunciation/abandonment as a defense for inchoate offenses at common law and MPC
|
At common law, withdrawal is not a defense - but once D withdrawals, he will no longer be vicariously liable for crimes committed by co-conspirators after he left conspiracy.
Under MPC, withdraw a defense only if D voluntarily and completely renounces the inchoate offense and the renunciation is based on a change of heart, not fear of failing or being caught. |
|
|
Merger rule and lesser included offenses.
Merger specifics for inchoate offenses. |
A 'lesser included offense' is an offense that is necessarily part of the greater offense and mergers with the greater offense.
Solicitation and attempt merge w/completed crime; conspiracy does not merge. |
|
|
First requirement for an insanity defense is that the D must have...
|
a mental disease or defect.
|
|
|
The M'Naughten test for insanity.
|
If the D either d/n know his act was wrong or d/n understand the nature of his act.
|
|
|
The irresistible impulse test for insanity.
|
Never exists alone, states adopt w/ M'Naughten. If the D either was unable to control his actions or was unable to conform his conduct to the law.
|
|
|
The Durham test for insanity.
|
If the D's conduct was the product of his mental illness - not the law anywhere.
|
|
|
The MPC test for insanity.
|
If the D lacked the substantial capacity to either appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct to the law.
|
|
|
Difference b/w insanity and incompetence.
|
Insanity goes to sanity at time of crime; if yes, D not guilty; incompetence goes to sanity at time of trial; if yes, trial postponed til D is competent.
|
|
|
Defense of intoxication - involuntary -
|
a defense to any crime, treated like mental illness, so apply insanity tests - must be completely involuntary state
|
|
|
Defense of intoxication - voluntary -
|
Defense to specific intent crimes if the intoxication prevents the D from forming the specific intent; Cannot be a defense to malice, general intent or strict liability crimes.
|
|
|
Infancy - common law defense:
|
If age is 7, prosecution not allowed; if age 14, rebuttable presumption against prosecution; if over 14, prosecution allowed.
|
|
|
Infancy - MPC standards:
|
If child under the age of 16 - criminal prosecution not allowed - must go thru juvenile ct. If child is 16-17, crim prosecution allowed if approved by juvenile ct.
|
|
|
Self-defense - nondeadly force rule:
|
A D may use deadly force in self-defense, if he is facing an imminent threat of death or serious injury.
|
|
|
Self-defense - the use of nondeadly force:
|
A D may use nondeadly force in self-defense if it is reasonably necessary to protect against an immediate use of unlawful force against himself.
|
|
|
Self-defense - the use of deadly force:
|
A D may use deadly force in self-defense, if he is facing an imminent threat of death or serious injury.
|
|
|
Self-defense - the aggressor rule:
|
A D may not use deadly force if he is the aggressor - but an aggressor may regain his right to use deadly self-defense if the aggressor withdrawals from the fight and communicates the withdrawal to the other person or the victim suddenly escalates a nondeadly fight into a deadly fight.
|
|
|
Self-defense - the retreat rule:
|
Majority/MPC rule, retreat is not required.
Minority/Common law rule, retreat required unless D c/n retreat in complete safety, D is in his own home or D is defending against a kidnapping, rape, robbery, arson or burglary. |
|
|
Self-defense - reasonable and unreasonable mistake rule:
|
Reasonable mistake --> self-defense still valid.
Unreasonable mistake: -common law rule --> no self-defense -minority/MPC rule --> voluntary manslaughter |
|
|
Use of force to prevent a crime - nondeadly and deadly force can be used...
|
Nondeadly force can be used if necessary to prevent a crime.
Deadly force can be used only to prevent a felony risking human life. |
|
|
Use of force in the defense of others
|
A D may use force and deadly force to protect others just the same as he could use it to defend himself.
|
|
|
Use of force and defense of property:
|
deadly force c/n be used to defend property, but deadly force can be used to prevent burglary, if the D is validly inside the home.
|
|
|
Rule regarding resisting arrest - If D knows or reasonably should know the person performing the arrest is a police officer:
|
majority rule - if arrest is unlawful, then the D may use nondeadly force to resist arresting officer
minority rule - force c/n be used to resist an arrest, even an unlawful one, unless arresting officer uses excessive force |
|
|
Duress is a defense if...
The exception... |
the D was forced to commit a crime under a threat of imminent death or serious bodily injury.
Duress c/n be a defense to homicide. |
|
|
Definition of entrapment:
Requirements of entrapment: |
If the govt unfairly tempted the D to commit the crime, he may claim entrapment.
The criminal design must have originated with the government and the D must not have been predisposed to commit the crime. *opens the door to character evidence |
