Criminal Law - Adachi

Front 1

Criminal Law

The Big Picture

Back 1

What CRIMES were committed?
SAC BIMARK ALBERT PURE CF

Solicitation, Attempt, Conspiracy, Battery, False Imprisonment, Mayhem, Assault, Rape, Kidnapping, Arson, Larceny, Burglary, Extortion, Robbery, Larceny by Trick, fale Pretenses, Uttering, Receiving stolen property, Embezzlement, Conversion, Forgery

Identify applicable DEFENSES -

I DEMAND my POPS

Insanity, Drunkenness, Entrapment, Mistake, Age, Necessity, Duress, Prevention of a crime, Defense of Others, Property, Self-defense
CRIMINAL HOMICIDE: Murder, felony mruder, manslaughter

Front 2

Classification of crimes

Back 2

Crimes are classified as FELONIES or MISDEMEANORS, usually depending on the potential length of imprisonment or the place of imprisonment (i.e. state prison).

Front 3

Malum in se crimes

Back 3

A malum in se crime is a crime which is inherently wrong.

Front 4

Malum Prohibitum Crime

Back 4

A malum prohibitum crime prohibits a morally neutral activity which legislatively has been prohibited.

Front 5

Actus Reus & Mens Rea

Back 5

Actus Reus is the physical act or part of crime.

Mens Rea is the mental part of the crime, involving D's state of mind at the time the crime is committed.

Generally ,the means rea must occur concurrently, or at the same time, as the actus reus in order for liability to attach.

Front 6

Parties to Crime

Back 6

Common law divided criminal liability of co-participants into four classifications:

Principal in First Degree: Commits acts which constitute crime.

Principal in Second Degree: Present during crime & assists, encourages, facilitates or directs actions of perpetrator. (FADE)

Accessory Before the Fact: Not present during crime, but solicits, encourages or aids perpetrator. (SAE)

Accessory After the Fact: Assist persons known to have committed crime in avoiding apprehension or conviction.

~Most states have abandoned these distinctions and hold all participants equally liable, except accessories after the fact, who are not liable for acts prior to involvement.

Front 7

Specific Intent vs. General Intent

Back 7

General Intent is the intent to perform or cause the actus reus. A crime requiring such an intent is called a "general intent crime."

Specific intent crimes are crimes which require the present of two states of mind: an intent to cause the actus reus, and specific intent to cause some further objective or goal.

Common specific intent crimes include burglary, assault, murder, attempt, conspiracy, theft, soliciation. (BAM CATS)

Front 8

Particular Mental States - Name Them

Back 8

Actual Intent
Wantonness/recklessness
Criminal Negligence
Malice
Knowledge
Strict liability
Transferred intent
Willfulness
Premediation & deliberation

(A Wet Criminal Made Kris See Three White Puppies)

Front 9

Actual Intent - Define

Back 9

Actual intent: Where D actually intends to cause the actus reus or is substantially certain his act will create the actus reus.

Front 10

Wantonness/recklessness - Define

Back 10

Where D intentionally performs the act which creates a very high probability that the actus reus will occur.

Front 11

Wantonness/Recklessness - Define

Back 11

Where D intentionally performs the act which creates a very high probability that the actus reus will occur.

Front 12

Criminal negligence - Define

Back 12

Where D should have been aware that her conduct creates a high probability that the actus reus will occur.

Front 13

Malice - Define

Back 13

Actual intent or wantonness (but not criminal negligence) without any exculpating or mitigating factors.

Front 14

Knowledge - Define

Back 14

Where D has knowledge of a certain fact.

Front 15

Strict Liability - Define

Back 15

No intent required.

Front 16

Willfulness - Define

Back 16

Ambiguous term which usually means that one must realize at the time he acts that he violated the law.

Front 17

Premediation & deliberation - Define

Back 17

Premediation means that the idea of killing was turned over in the mind or given a second thought.

Deliberation means that D was acting calmly as opposed to impulsively or in sudden anger.

Front 18

Transferred Intent - Define

Back 18

D's intent aims criminal act at one party but causes it to another, D's intent is treated as if he intended injury to that other person.

Front 19

Solicitation - Define
What is the required act and intent?

Back 19

Inciting another to commit any felony or misdemeanor involving breach of the peace.

Actus Reus: Instigation or origination of criminal scheme
Mens Rea: Specific intent to incite another to commit a crime.

Front 20

Solicitation - Vicarious Liability

Back 20

Accomplice liability if one solicited either attempts/perpetrates crime.

Front 21

Does soliciation merge?

Back 21

Yes, soliciation merges into liability solicitor incurs as conspirator/accomplice.

Front 22

What happens if the solicitor withdraws?

Back 22

Solicitor who withdraws remains guilty of soliciation but avoids accomplice liability.

Front 23

Attempt - Define
What is the required actus reus and intent?

Back 23

An act in the direction of perpetrating an intended crime.

Actus Reus: D must commit an act which goes beyond mere preparation.

Mens Rea: Specific intent to perform or cause an act, which if accomplished, would be the target crime.

Front 24

Does Attemt merge?

Back 24

Attempt merges into consummated target offense

Front 25

What happens if the D withdraws during an attempt (Majority and Minority rules)?

Back 25

Maj - D's abandonment of plan does not excuse liability.

Min - D absolved of liability if she voluntarily, permanently and successfully abandons criminal project.

Front 26

What is the relationship between attempt and impossibility?

Attempt and Mistake of fact?

Back 26

Impossibility: legal impossibility precludes attempt liability, while factual impossibility does not.

Mistake of fact: Because attempt is a specific intent crime, any mistake of fact, reasonable or unreasonable, is a defense.

Front 27

Conspiracy - Define
What is the required
actus reus and intent?

Back 27

A combination or agreement for an unlawful purpose.

Actus Reus: Mere act of 2 or more persons combining or joining together to achieve an unlawful goal (Majority requires an overt act).

Mens Rea: Actual intent to combine + specific intent to achieve unlawful goal.

Front 28

Conspiracy:

Withdrawal?
Merger?

Back 28

Withdrawal: No defense unles sconspirator withdraws before commission of hte overt act (However, under MPC, voluntary withdrawal is a defense where D thwarts success of conspiracy)

Merger: No Merger

Front 29

Conspiracy - Vicarious Liability/Pinkerton Rule

Back 29

Under the Pinkerton rule, conspirator is liable for any criminal act of co-conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Front 30

Conspiracy - Wharton's Rule

Back 30

It takes two to tango: crimes which require two parties cannot be prosecuted as conspiracies.

Front 31

Conspiracy/Impossibility

Back 31

Where conspiratorial objective is legal there is no conspiracy.

Front 32

Conspiracy/Chain Theory

Back 32

D's liability extends to acts of any co-conspirator.

Front 33

Conspiracy/Wheel Theory

Back 33

No liability where other people independently conspire with a confederate.

Front 34

Battery

Required: Actus Reus and Mens Rea

Back 34

Intentional or ciminally negligent applicatio nof unlawful force to the person of another.

Actus Reus: Slightest touching

Mens Rea: Actual intent either to contact V or criminal negligence

Front 35

False Imprisonment

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 35

Intentional use of force to confine the person of another.

Actus Reus: Use of force and cconfinement.

Mens Rea: Actual intent to exert force and achieve confinement.

~Force may be exerted by barriers, physical restraint or threats.

Front 36

Mayhem

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 36

Maiming or disfiguring another with malice.

Actus Reus: Causing bodily injury which permanently maims or disfigures another.

Mens Rea: Presence or actual intent or wanton conduct.

Front 37

Assault

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 37

Attempted battery rule

Actus Reus: Act of perpetration

Mens Rea: With specific intent to commit an act which would be a battery.

Minority requires present ability to injure V.

Front 38

Assault/Intentional Inducement of Fear Rule

Back 38

Menacing act or gesture with specific intent to produce in another a fear of imminent battery.

Front 39

Aggravated Assault

Back 39

Some statutes escalate assault to a felony if aggravating factors are involved (i.e. deadly weapon.) There is no attempted assault.

Front 40

Rape

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 40

Sexual intercourse with a female not his wife when he knows or should know it is without consent.

Actus Reus: Slightest penetratoin of vaginal area without consent.

Mens Rea: Actual intent to have intercourse or criminal negligence.

Front 41

Statutory Rape

Back 41

Sexual intercourse with a female under an age specified by law.

Front 42

Kidnapping

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 42

False imprisonment accompanied by asportation of the V.

Actus Reus: False imprisonment and coerced movement of V.

Mens Rea: Actual intent to asport and confine another.

Front 43

Arson

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 43

Malicious buring of the dwelling house of another.

AR: any act which causes another's dwelling to burn.

MR: intent that buring take place, or with reckless disregard of an obvious risk that the structure would burn.

~Modern law has abandoned the dwelling house requirement.

Front 44

Larceny

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 44

Definition & AR: Trespassory taking and carring away of another's personal property.

MR: With specific intent to deprive him of it permanently.

Front 45

Burglary

Actus Reus

Mens Rea

Back 45

Trespassory breaking and entering of a dwelling house of another at night with the specific intent to commit a felony or larceny therein.

AR: Any slight physical intrusion into a dwelling house without consent.

MR: Specific intent to commit a felony or larceny therein.

~Modern law has abandoned many of the common law elements such as the "breaking and entering," "dwelling house," "nighttime" and "intent to commit a felony" requirements.

Front 46

Extortion

Back 46

Use of threates of future harm with specific intent to induce another to relinquish property.

~It is no defense that D has a lawful right to do the threatened act or that the information which the accused threatens to reveal is true.

Front 47

Robbery

Back 47

Larceny from the person or presence of another by the use of force or intimidation upon him or her.

The force applied must be designed to effectuate the taking.

The property taken must be from the person or presence of the victim.

Front 48

Larceny by trick - define

Fraud - define

Back 48

The use of fraud to procure a temporary delivery of mere possession of another's property with intent to deprive him/her of it permanently.

Fraud - Fraud requires a representation of fact which the maker knows is false and the maker intends to cause another to give up property.

Front 49

Fraud

Back 49

Fraud requires a representation of fact which the maker knows is false and the maker intends to cause another to give up property.

Front 50

False Pretenses

Back 50

Fraudulent misrepresentation of past or present fact which causes the V to pass title to personal property made with specific intent to defraud.

Majority holds that false pretenses relate to a past or present fact, the minority view also includes false promises to do something in the future.

Front 51

Uttering

Back 51

Offering as genuine an instrument known to be false with intent to defraud.

Front 52

Receiving Stolen Property

Back 52

Receiving property knowing it to be stolen with specific intent to deprive the owner thereof.

Front 53

Embezzlement

Back 53

Conversion of personal property of anotehr by a person in lawful possession (as a result of a fiduciary relationship)

Front 54

Conversion or Larceny by Conversion

Back 54

Conversion of personal property by a person in lawful possession with the specific intent to defraud.

Front 55

Forgery

Back 55

Making a false writing having apparent legal significance with intent to defraud.

Front 56

Drunkenness

Involuntary intoxication

Voluntary Intoxication

Back 56

Involuntary Intoxication: Where intoxication results from force, mistake, fraud or medication prescription. (MFMF)

Voluntary Intoxication: Applies only to specific intent crimes.

Front 57

Insanity

Back 57

Where Mental illness has certain prescribes effects on D's mind, acts that are otherwise criminal are excused.

Rules: M'Naghten Rule, Irresistible Impulse, American Law Institute Substantial Capacity Test, Durham Rule, Diminished Responsibility.

Front 58

Insanity/M'Naghten Rule

Back 58

Disease of mind causes a defect of reaon such that D lacks ability at the time of his actions to know the WRONGFULNESS of actions and nature/quality of his act.

Front 59

Insanity/Irresistible Impulse

Back 59

Mental disease makes D incapable of controlling his conduct.

Front 60

Insanity/American Law Institute Substantial Capacity Test

Back 60

Mental disease causes D to lack substantial capacity to appreciate criminality of her conduct or conform her conduct to the requirements of law.

Front 61

Insanity/Durham Rule

Back 61

But for the mental illness, D would not have committed the act.

Front 62

Insanity/ Diminished Responsibility

Back 62

Mental illness short of insanity may be asserted in homicide cases/specific interest crimes to mitigate culpability or to reduce the charge.

Front 63

Entrapment

Back 63

One may excuse his admitted performance of illegal act (other than one involving serious injury) by showing htat he did it at the intituation of law enforcement agent.

Front 64

Entrapment/Majority & Fed Rule focuses on what?

Back 64

D's subjective disposition to commit the crime

Front 65

Entrapment/Minority rule focuses on what?

Back 65

objective effect of police activity on reasonable law abiding person.

Front 66

Mistake - define

of fact

of law

Back 66

An honest mistake which negates a mental state with respect to any material elements of an offense is a defense.

Mistakes of fact: look to the reasonableness of the mistake/type of intent required. For malice and genreal intent crimes, the mistake must be reasonable; for specific intent crimes, an unreasonable mistake of fact is a defense.

Mistake of law: not a defense unless the government has not publicized the law or knowledge of the law is a material element of the offense.

Front 67

Age

Back 67

Modern statutes often provide that any person over the age of 13 or 14 is criminally responsible for their acts.

At common law, child under the age of 7 who committed a crime was not liable. Between the ages of 7-14, there was a rebuttable presumption that the child was unable to understand the wrongfulness of her acts.

Modern statutes either set a certain age when a child becomes liable, usually 13 or 14, or follow the common law rules.

Front 68

Necessity

Back 68

Conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable where physical forces of nature make this necessary to avoid a greater evil.

Front 69

Duress

Back 69

One may excuse an actus reus (not involving a homicide) performed or caused by showing that he or she acted under a threat from another to imminently inflict death or serious bodily harm to himself or a member of his immediate family. An act committed under duress is deemed "excusable" not justifiable.

Front 70

Prevention of a crime

Back 70

One is justified using non-deadly force which reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent a misdemeanor or felony constituting a breach of the peace, and deadly force may be used to prevent a dangerous felony involving risk to human life.

Front 71

Defense of others

Majority & Minority Views

Back 71

Majority: holds that D may use such force which she reasonably believes is necessary under the circumstances.

Minority: holds that D may use the same force in defending another as the person being protected is privileged to use.

Front 72

Property Defense

Back 72

One is justified in using that amount of non-deadly force which is reasonably necesary to prevent imminent trespass to his/her real or personal property; deadly force not justified unless to prevent intrusion into home.

Front 73

Self Defense

Back 73

Innocent person justified in using non-deadly force which seems reasonably necessary to prevent physical attack; deadly force may be used only in response to deadly force. The majority view imposes no duty to retreat while the minority does unless at home.

Front 74

Homicide

Back 74

Killing of a human being by another with criminal intent.

Front 75

Homicide - killing

Back 75

any voluntary act/omission that cuases death.

Front 76

Homicide - a human being

Back 76

A baby is a human being when it is born alive, i.e. circulation independent of the mother; death occurs when there is a permanent cessation of heartbeat/respiration of brain death. Some states have statuts which define when a fetus is a human being for the purposes of homicide law.

Front 77

Homicide - causation

Back 77

Apply torts proximate cause rules; death must occur within 1 years of criminal act (some states extend this to 3 years)

Front 78

Homicide - criminal intent

Back 78

D's state of mind determines whether the crime is murder or manslaughter.

Front 79

Duress

Back 79

One may excuse an actus reus (not involving a homicide) performed or caused by showing that he or she acted under a threat from another to imminently inflict death or serious bodily harm to himself or a member of his immediate family. An act committed under duress is deemed "exusable" not justifiable.

Front 80

Prevention of a crime

Back 80

One is justified using non-deadly force which reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent a misdemeanor or felony consituting a breach of the peace, and deadly force may be used to prevent a dangerous felony involving risk to human life.

Front 81

Defense of others

Back 81

Majority - holds that D may use such force which she reasonably believes is necessary under the circumstances.
Minority - holds that D may use the same force in defending another as the person being protected is privileged to use.

Front 82

Property Defense

Back 82

One is justified in using that amount of non-deadly force which is reasonably necessary to prevent imminent trespass to his/her real or personal property; deadly force not justified unless to prevent intrusion into home.

Front 83

Self Defense

Back 83

Innocent person justified in using non-deadly force which seems reasonably necessary to prevent physical attack; deadly force may be used only in response to deadly force.
Majority: imposes no duty to retreat while the minority does unless at home.

Front 84

Common Law Murder

Back 84

~Homicide committed with malice aforethought?

~Criminal homicide
+actual intent to kill; or
+ actual intent to inflict grave bodily injury; or
+ wantonness; or
+ Felony Murder Rule: State of mind one is in while committing dangerous felony.

Front 85

Felony Murder Rule Checklist

Back 85

~Did an UNINTENDED death occur during crime?
~Was the crime a FMR FELONY?
~Does the MERGER DOCTRINE apply?
~Is purpose of felony underlying FMR totally INDEPENDENT of homicide?
~Are all teh ELEMENTS of the underlying felony present?
~Did killing occur during the PERPETRATION of the felony?
~Was the killing a FORESEEABLE result of the felony?

Front 86

FMR - Was the killing act performed by one of the felons?

Back 86

CL: Killing could be committed by co-felon, victim, police officer or bystander

Calif. & NY require killing be committed by accused/co-felon.

Front 87

FMR - Was the Victim an innocent person?

Back 87

CL: Felony Murder Rule applied to killing of any person, even co-felon.

REDLINE (Pennsylvania case): FMR does not apply where felon justifiably shot by police officer.

CA and NY require victim to be "innocent party" before FMR applies.

Front 88

Voluntary Manslaughter

Back 88

An intentional criminal homicide committed without malice aforethought, i.e. w/mitigating factors: Imperfect self defense, unreasonable mistake of fact, coercion, voluntary intoxication, mental disease, anger, heat of passion (reasonable provocation + inadequate cooling time).

Front 89

Involuntary Manslaughter

Back 89

An unintentional homicide committed w/o malice; an intent to inflict non-serious bodily harm or state of mind one is in when s/he is acting in a way that creates grossly negligent risk of death or great bodily injury.

Midemeanor manslaughter rule: Accidental killing while engaged in a non-dangerous felony or misdemeanor, that is malum in se, is involuntary manslaughter.

Front 90

Defense to homicide

Back 90

COA SIN:

CRIME prevention
Defense of OTHERS
AGE
SELF-defense
INSANITY
NECESSITY

Front 91

Statutory Categories of Murder: First Degree Murder

Back 91

First Degree Murder: intentional criminal homicide with malice aforethought, premediation & deliberation; Includes felony murders committed during dangerous felonies (burg, arson, rape, robbery, kidnapping, sodomy); any murder committed by means of poison, torture, ambush, bomb.

Front 92

Statutory Categories of Murder: Second Degree Murder

Back 92

Second Degree Murder: residual category, any murder which is not in the 1st is 2nd degree. Intentinal criminal homicides with malice aforethought but w/o premediation and deliveration; includes wanton and depraved heart murders, FMR murders not named above.