Criminal Law Outline: Homocide

Front 1

Criminal homocide

Back 1

A killing committed without justification or excuse

Front 2

Murder

Back 2

Murder: Intent to kill-one who intentionally kills another human being without:Justification (self defense)Excuse (e.g. insanity)Mitigation circumstances (e.g. sudden heat of passion)Is guilty of malice aforethought. Intent to kill: Willful, deliberate, premeditated

Front 3

Malice aforethought

Back 3

Encompasses 4 different states of mind

1. Intent to kill

2. Intent to cause grievous bodily harm

3. Depraved heart killing [extreme recklessness

4. Intent to commit a felony with death occurring [felony murder rule]

Front 4

Manslaughter

Back 4

A killing without malice aforethought. Without justification or excuse.

Three types:

1. Voluntary manslaighter- Sudden heat of passion killing as a result of adequate provocation.

2. Misdemeanor manslaughter- death resulting from a commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony

3. Involuntary manslaughter- death resulting from the commission of a lawful act in an unlawful manner or without due cause and circumspection.

Front 5

First degree murder

Back 5

I + P.

Willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing.

Willful- have the specific intent to commit homicide.

Deliberate- a measured and evaluated choice

Deals with D's thought process. Mens Rea. Free from sudden passion.

Premeditated killing- killing is thought about beforehand

Enough time for a second look

Courts are split on how long

--------------------

1st degree: perpetrated by means of poison, lying in wait, willful, premeditated, deliberate killing or which is committed in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of arson, rape, robbery or burglary.-intent to kill murder= intentionally killing without justification, excuse or mitigating circumstances with deliberation and premeditation.

Front 6

Willful

Back 6

To have a specific intent to commit to homicide

Front 7

Premeditated

Back 7

Killing is thought about beforehand

Interval between initial thought and ultimate actions should be long enough to afford a reasonable man time for a 'second look'

Courts are split on time

PremeditatedState v. Schrader-defendant and victim got into argument-defendant stabbed victim 51 times-ct. ruled that no time is too short for a wicked man to construct premeditation-premeditation can be established in “twinkling of an eye”

Front 8

Proving first degree murder

Back 8

Circumstances that can prove these elements include:

Lack of provocation on the part of the diseased

Conduct and statements of D

Threats and declaration of the D given before and during the course of the act giving rise to the death

Ill-will or previous difficulty between the parties

Dealing a lethal blow after V has been rendered helpless

Evidence that the killing was done in a brutal manner

The nature and number of the V's wounds

Front 9

Second degree murder

Back 9

1. Intentional killing without premeditated

2. Committing an act which the actor knows will probably cause death

3. Depraved indifference / malignant heart killing

------'-------------

2nd degree: all other kinds of murders-intentional killings that are not premeditated and deliberate-intent to inflict grievous bodily injury killings-reckless killings- extreme indifference to the value of human life: “Depraved heart”-deaths that occur in the commission of a felony other than arson, rape, robbery, or burglary

Front 10

Intentional killing without premeditation.

Back 10

2nd degree murder

Ex. STATE V GUTHRIE

Had psychiatric problems/ nose sensitivity. D stabbed V when V poked fun at him and snapped him with towel. Held that there was not adequate premeditation. The state cannot prove premeditation by showing merely that the intent to kill came into existence at the time of the killing, as this would abrogate the line between first and second degree murder

Front 11

Committing an act which the actor knows will probably cause death

Back 11

2nd degree murder

Ex. MIDGETT V STATE

D habitually beat his malnourished son. While drunk, he hit and killed him. Held that 1st degree murder conviction could not stand. Second degree murder was appropriate since there was no premeditation and D knew his blows were likely to kill the V.

Front 12

Depraved indifference / malignant heart killing

Back 12

2nd degree murder

Theory is that malice can be needed when D disregards a substantial risk and commits an act with a high probability of resulting in a death and does so with a base, antisocial motive and a wanton disregard for human life.

Ex. BERRY V SUPERIOR COURT

D raised fighting dogs and used them to guard his pot field. Two year old V was mauled and killed by the dog. Held that D ignored significant and unjustifiable risk by having the dog unframed and that the dog was there for a base, antisocial purpose. Ill-will or hatred of V is not required for malignant heart murder

Front 13

Felony Murder Doctrine

Back 13

In general death that results from the commission of a specifically listed felony [usually arson, rape, robbery, burglary, and sometimes kidnapping] or during the commission of any felony constitutes first/second degree murder.

At CL, person guilty of murder if he kills someone, even accidentally, during the commission of any felony.o In states that use Pennsylvania, usually arson, robbery, rape and burglary felonies involved= 1st degree murdero All other felonies= 2nd degree murdero Rule very unpopular among stateso Some limitations by states§ Inherently Dangerous Felony LimitationMajority-In the abstract= look at the definition of the crime to see if inherently dangerous.

Facts= look at facts of each case to see if this particular felony inherently dangerous

Front 14

Deliberate

Back 14

deliberate means to measure & evaluate the major facets of a choice or problem-it is the process of determining upon a course of conduct to kill as a result of thought, including weighing the reasons for and against the action and considering the consequences of the action.-such state of mind presupposed a cool purpose, free from influence of excitement or passion-thus the idea that the most heinous killings are those that are cold blooded.+It is impossible for a person to deliberate unless he premeditates+It is impossible to premeditate without possessing a deliberate state of mind+Premeditation involves quantity of time.+deliberation speaks of quality of time.

Front 15

Provocation as a mitigating factor

Back 15

Provocation as mitigating factor (murder à voluntary manslaughter)-one who kills in sudden rage may be guilty of manslaughter if his anger is the result of adequate provocationTraditional CL categories of provocation doctrine:Ÿ Extreme assault or battery upon the defendantŸ Mutual combatŸ Defendant’s illegal arrestŸ Injury or serious abuse of a close relativeŸ Sudden discovery of spouse’s adulteryGirouard v. State-words alone cannot provide the sufficient provocation to mitigate crime from murder to manslaughter**But can lower degree from 1st to 2nd-Ct. recited the rule of provocationŸ There must have been adequate provocation.Ÿ The killing must have been in the heat of passionŸ It must have been a sudden heat of passion- that is, the killing must have followed the provocation before there had been a reasonable opportunity for the passion to cool.Ÿ There must have been a causal connection between the provocation, and the fatal act

Front 16

Unintentional killing , reckless

Back 16

Common Law has 4 levels of risk in cases of unintentional killings:

1. Due care (no liability)

2. Ordinary negligence (no criminal liability)

3.Gross negligence (involuntary manslaughter)

4. Wanton conduct (murder; malice quarter-3)

Unintentional KillingsWanton MurderMalice aforethought is implied if D’s conduct manifests an extreme indifference to the value of human life. For states that separate murders into degrees, this is 2nd degree murder.-at common law, this kind of conduct referred to as “an abandoned and malignant heart” or “depraved heart”-Under MPC, such conduct is referred to as reckless.Under wanton murder doctrine, the accused does not intend to kill, but his conduct manifests such a high degree of indifference to value of human life that the actor as good as intended to kill his victims.Some examples of Wanton ConductShooting a gun at a crowd of people (not actually intending to kill anyone).Driving car at high speed in rain and while intoxicated.Omissions:Parents indifferently fails to feed her infant for 2 week.Neighbor has 2 big pit bulls and trains them to fight and no fence around the house and kids living in the next house.Another definition: When the risk of death is great and the justification for taking the risk is weak or non-existent, the actor is guilty of murder, she has acted with a “depraved heart.”

Front 17

Involuntary manslaughter

Back 17

Common Law: common law courts have used “gross negligence” “culpable negligence”

MPC: Some ordinary negligence made criminal, unlike common law.

Criminal negligence, or involuntary manslaughter, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that reasonable people would exercise in the same situation, It is more than civil negligence- it must be so gross as to be deserving punishment