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;
101 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Case-in-chief defense
|
Aka prima facie case. Creates reasonable doubt about one element of the crime
|
|
|
Affirmative defense
|
Admits the basic crime, argues for acquittal based on extenuating circumstances
|
|
|
Curley v. US
|
If there is a reasonable doubt, the judge must require acquittal
|
|
|
6th Amendment
|
Right to speedy and public trial with an impartial jury
|
|
|
Jury Nullification
|
Act of returning a jury verdict contrary to the law
"may convict" People v. Williams |
|
|
Rule of lenity
|
All doubts when reading a criminal statute should be resolved in favor of the D -- recognizes the presumption of innocence
|
|
|
Consequentialist
|
Believes that actions are morally right if and only if they result in desireable consequences
Theory of punishment=utilitarianism--look forward at the predictable effects of punishment on the offender/society |
|
|
Non-consequentialist
|
Believes actions are morally right or wrong in themselves, regardless of the consequences
Theory of punishment--Retributivism: look backwards at the harm caused by the crime and attempt to calibrate the punishment to the crime |
|
|
Theories of punishment
|
(1) Incapacitation
(2) Retribution (2) Deterrence (4) Rehabilitation |
|
|
Recidivism
|
Released and re-commit crimes
|
|
|
Expressive function of punsihment
|
Why we punish, what we want society to think
|
|
|
Regina v. Dudley & Stephens
|
Under common law there is no defense of necessity for homicide
|
|
|
Factors to reduce guideline's sentence
|
(1) D's acceptance of responsibility
(2) Willingness to provide "substantial assistance" to the government |
|
|
Collateral consequences
|
After incarceration: ineligibility for federal welfare benefits, public housing, employment opportunities
|
|
|
Void for vagueness doctrine
|
Imposes a duty on the legislature to draft statutes that are clearly understandable to
(1) provide fair notice (2) limit police discretion (3) limit jury discretion to imprison people Papachristou-- vagrancy ordinance Morales-- community lobbied gang statute Kolender--loitering statute |
|
|
Cruel & Unusual Punishment
|
Punishments that are out of proportion to the crime violate the 8th Amendment
|
|
|
Graham Factors for Cruel & Unusual Punishment
|
(1) National consensus
(2) Goals of punishment (3) Culpability (4) Judicial exercise-- historical understanding (5) Evolving standards of decency (6) Proportionality |
|
|
Kennedy v. Louisiana
|
The death penalty is not proportional punishment for child rape
|
|
|
Graham v. FL
|
No sentence of life w/o parol for a juvenile who committed a non-homicidal crime
|
|
|
EQP of 14th Amend
|
Cannot treat people differently based on race unless it serves a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest= strict scrutiny
|
|
|
Basic elements of all crimes
|
(1) Actus reus
(2) Mens Rea (3) Causation (4) Concurrence |
|
|
Actus Reus
|
Voluntary or culpable omission that causes a social harm
|
|
|
Inchoate crime
|
Criminalizing planning or thinking of social harms leading up to the completed social harm
|
|
|
Hate Speech
|
Increased penalty for a crime that D was motivated by racial or other bias
Wisonsin v. Michell-- does not violate the 1st Amendment; serves as an aggravating factor |
|
|
Voluntary act
|
Willed body movement. Includes habitual behavior
|
|
|
Involuntary act
|
Nothing more than an organ of the body acting and occurs by accident, force, reflex or convulsion or during sleep, hypnosis, unconsciousness
**time frame matters-- Decina |
|
|
Omission
|
(1) Causes social harm
(2) Physically capable of acting (3) Had a legal duty |
|
|
Legal Duty
|
(1) Special relationship
(2) Contract (3) Statutory duty (4) D creates the risk (5) D voluntarily assumes care *Requires direct assistance or summoning help |
|
|
Good Samaritan Laws
|
Duty to rescue to the general public
|
|
|
Status Crimes
|
Criminalize a person's condition or state of being
Robinson v. CA: criminalizing being a narcotics addict Powell v. TX: alcoholics arrested for being drunk is not a status crime Jones: Criminalizing homelessness |
|
|
Mens Rea
|
Culpability & moral blameworthiness
|
|
|
MPC Purposely
|
Must have intent to engage in the conduct and cause the outcome
|
|
|
MPC Knowingly
|
Awareness of the nature of one's conduct or presence of circumstances or practical certainty that it will result
*Does not have to intend the outcome, just that the outcome is reasonably certain **explicit |
|
|
MPC Recklessly
|
D knew or should have know there was a substantial and unjustifiable risk that he was consciously disregarding = gross deviation from standard of conduct
**default mental state |
|
|
MPC Negligently
|
Reasonable person standard-- D should have been aware that there was a substantial and unjustifiable risk and he engaged in the activities anyways
|
|
|
CL Malice
|
(1) An actual intention to do a particular kind of harm that in fact was done OR
(2) Recklessness as to whether such harm should occur |
|
|
Natural & Probable Consequences
|
Can infer intent based on the circumstances
|
|
|
Deadly Weapons Rule
|
If involves a deadly weapon aimed at a vital part of the body, intent to kill may be inferred
|
|
|
Conditional Intent
|
If D has the intent to act if certain conditions arise then that is enough to satisfy intent, unless Congress explicitly says no
|
|
|
Transferred Intent
|
An intent to direct action toward one target can be transferred to another target
People v. Scott: shooting into the park and missed target and shot another person |
|
|
Specific Intent
|
**CL ONLY: offense refers tot he intent of the D to do something further than the act or achieve some further consequence; beyond engaging in the act
-Desire the social harm will occur EX: Burglary, larceny, receiving stolen property *Voluntary intoxication can negate this intent |
|
|
General Intent
|
**CL ONLY: required mental state entails only intent to do an act that causes a social harm
EX: battery, rape |
|
|
CL Knowledge
|
Person knows of a fact if he is either aware of the fact or correctly believes that fact exists
|
|
|
Willful blindness
|
CL: If the only reason D didn't know the material element is because he made a deliberate attempt to not know, knowledge is established-- practically knowing
MPC: Awareness of a high probability of an element's existence suffices |
|
|
Strict Liability
|
No mental state
CL: assumption that every statute has a mens rea, but if not assume general intent crime MPC: if no mental state, default to recklessness -Considers violations strict liability Mostly found with welfare offenses |
|
|
Morissette Factors Typical in Strict Liability
|
(1) No mens rea
(2) Crime does not exist in common law (3) It's a statute aimed at promoting welfare, heath or safety (4) Punishes an omission (5) D is in a position to prevent the harm & it is reasonable to expect this of D (6) Social harm is risk of injury as opposed to actual injury |
|
|
Mistake of law
|
Mistake or misunderstanding regarding some part of the law--> did not know was committing a crime. Generally not a defense.
EXCEPT: (1) reliance on an official interpretation (2) Ignorance or mistake negates the mens rea (3) Fair notice & due process not provided |
|
|
Mistake of fact
|
**CL for specific intent mistake only need to be in good faith
**CL general intent mistake must be both honest and reasonable MPC does not distinguish between mistakes of fact and law |
|
|
Moral Wrong Doctrine
|
**OLD CL Doctrine
Even if honest and reasonable mistake of fact, if the conduct would be immoral under the facts he believed them to be true then can still be held liable for the originally charged offense |
|
|
Legal Wrong Doctrine
|
**More contemporary
If D's conduct would be illegal if the facts were as be believed them to be, he can be held liable for the original charged offense regardless of whether he acted under honest and reasonable mistake of fact |
|
|
Causation
|
(1) But for
(2) Direct (3) Proximate causation-- intervening causes (4) is it fair & just to hold D criminally liable? |
|
|
Concurrence
|
(1) Temporal: mens rea at same time as actus reus
(2) Motivational: mens rea must motivate actus reus |
|
|
CL Murder
|
Unlawful killing with malice aforethought and
(1) Intent to kill (2) Intent to commit serious bodily injury (3) Depraved heart (4) Felony murder |
|
|
CL 1st Degree Murder
|
(1) premeditation & deliberation
(2) Specified as 1st degree in statute [lying in wait, poison, torture] (3) During the commission of an enumerated felony [rape, robbery, kidnapping, burglary, or arson] |
|
|
Premeditation
|
Reflect upon and thought about killing in advance
-Wink of an eye: premeditation can occur in an instant |
|
|
Deliberation
|
Quality of the thought process-- must be taken with a cool head
|
|
|
Anderson factors of premeditation & deliberation
|
(1) Planning activity
(2) Motive (3) Manner of killing |
|
|
CL 2nd Degree Murder
|
Default murder charge/degree
-Anything that's not 1st degree |
|
|
CL manslaughter
|
Unlawful killing of a human without malice aforethought
|
|
|
CL Voluntary Manslaughter
|
Intentional killing that would normally be 2nd degree but is reduced because of provocation defense
**mitigation of 2nd degree murder |
|
|
Involuntary manslaughter
|
Death through criminal negligence [aka gross negligence and recklessness]
|
|
|
MPC Murder
|
Killing committed purposely or knowingly or recklessly under circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to human life
|
|
|
MPC Manslaughter
|
Killing committed recklessly but without extreme indifference to human life and the homicide that would otherwise be murder is committed under influence of EMED w/ reasonable explanation
|
|
|
Early CL test for provocation
|
Provocation only if killed in response to
(1) aggravated assault (2) Observation of a serious crime against a close relative (3) Illegal arrest (4) Mutual combat (5) Catching one's wife in act of adultery |
|
|
Mere words
|
Mere words are not enough to constitute provocation
|
|
|
CL Modern Reasonable Person Test for Provocation
|
(1) D acted in heat of passion
(2) D was reasonably provoked into heat of passion (3) D did not have sufficient time to cool off (4) A reasonable person in D's shoes wouldn't have had sufficient time to cool off **must be causal connection b/w provocation, passion & killing |
|
|
MPC's EMED Test for Provocation
|
Mitigated to manslaughter when it is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse
** viewpoint of D as he believes the circumstances to be |
|
|
Depraved Heart Murder
|
Malice is implied when a person acts with an abandoned or malignant heart
(1) Acted with gross recklessness (2) Manifested extreme indifference to human life-- realized that his actions created a substantial and unjustified risk of death and acted anyways |
|
|
Involuntary manslaughter
|
(1) Mens rea= criminal negligence= gross negligence or recklessness--> disregarded substantial and unjustifiable risk
**Step down from depraved heart murder |
|
|
Felony Murder
|
Person who kills during the commission or attempted commission of a qualifying felony has committed 2nd degree murder
**NO mens rea required LIMITATIONS (1) inherently dangerous felony (2) Res Gestae: proximity b/w felony & homicide (3) Merger Doctrine |
|
|
Third Party Killings: The Agency Rule
|
If a 3rd party is reasonable for the killing, the felony murder rule does not apply
Prosecution will have to prove malice aforethought to convict for murder |
|
|
Misdemeanor Manslaughter Doctrine
|
(1) During commission of a misdemeanor
(2) Felony cannot serve as underlying felony for felony murder (3) Constitutes involuntary manslaughter LIMITATIONS: 1. Only for evil misdemeanors 2. Inherently dangerous limitation 3. Not applied if underlying crime is strict liability |
|
|
Forcible rape
|
(1) Sexual intercourse
(2) By force or threat of force (3) Without the victim's consent |
|
|
Force
|
Some require proof of resistance (1) did resist (2) had a reasonable fear or apprehension but couldn't resist
|
|
|
Consent
|
Rape occurs if sex occurs without consent/against the will of the alleged victim
-Can be revoked-- In re John Z **D can defend on the grounds that he had a honest/good faith and reasonable belief that consent had been given= consent as a defense |
|
|
Non-forcible rape
|
Sexual intercourse with a person who is non-conscious or mentally/developmentally challegned
Fraud in the factum: fraud about nature of the act--> Consent is null Fraud in the inducement: sex by false promise or deceit--> consent is valid |
|
|
Justification Defense
|
D claims he did the right thing or took the most appropriate action under the circumstances-- focus on correctness of D's actions
|
|
|
Excuse Defenses
|
D's act is presumed to have been wrong, but D asks to excuse him from liability for some reason personal to the actor
|
|
|
Self Defense
|
(1) Imminent threat of unlawful force
(2) The force was necessary to repel the threat (3) The force was proportionate to the threatened force **Cannot be the initial aggressor |
|
|
Imperfect Self Defense
|
D can get a lesser included sentence if D is not able to convince the jury of all the elements of self defense
|
|
|
Castle doctrine
|
One is not required to retreat before using deadly force if one is attacked in their own home
|
|
|
Stand Your Ground Laws
|
Removes the duty to retreat
|
|
|
Defense of Others
|
Person uses force against another person to defend a third person he honestly and reasonably believed the force he used was necessary to protect the third person from an imminent unlawful attack
|
|
|
Defense of home
|
Deadly force can be used against an intruder of your home if the intruder intends to commit a felony and/or injury to the occupant
**some jur give the presumption that the homeowner's belief was reasonable |
|
|
Defense of property
|
Generally no deadly force for defense of property
|
|
|
Necessity defense
|
CL: (1) harm avoided is greater thant he harm caused by D breaking the law (2) Clear and imminent danger (3) Belief was reasonable (4) No effective legal alternatives (5) No legislative preclusion (6) Did not create the dangerous situation
MPC: (1) Balancing of harms (2)No legislative preclusion |
|
|
Duress
|
CL: (1) Imminent threat (2) Reasonable fear that threat would be carried out unless committed a specified crime (3) No reasonable opportunity to escape
MPS: (1) Coerced by threat of force (2) Person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist |
|
|
Voluntary Intoxication Defense
|
Can negate a specific intent crime, NOT allowed for general intent crimes
|
|
|
Involuntary Intoxication Defense
|
Can be used with specific or general intent crimes
4 types of situations: 1. Where theintoxication was caused by the fault ofanother 2. Where theintoxication was caused by an innocentmistake on the part of the D 3. Where a D unknowingly suffers from aphysiological or psychological conditions that renders him abnormallysusceptible to a legal intoxicant 4. Where unexpected intoxication results from amedically prescribed druga. |
|
|
CL Insanity
|
M'Naghten Test:
(1) Party has a significant deficit in mental competence or capacity that (2) Leads him to not know the nature of his act (3) OR leads him to not know those acts are wrong |
|
|
MPC Insanity §4.01
|
Aperson is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time such conduct as aresult of mental disease or defect
(1) he lacks substantial capacity eitherto (2) appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or (3) to conform hisconduct to the requirements of law |
|
|
Diminished Capacity
|
CL: Mens Rea Variant--mental illness negates the mental state
Partial responsibility variant: less blameworthy because of mental disease MPC §4.02: allows mental disease to show D did not have the state of mind which is element of offense |
|
|
Infancy/Youth Defense
|
CL: Less than 7: No criminal capacity
7-14: Rebuttable presumption of no criminal capacity Over 14: Fully responsible MPC: juvenile until age 16 |
|
|
Entrapment
|
(1) Objective approach: looks at police actions to determine if they are reprehensible
(2) Subjective approach: looks at if D had a predisposition to engage in activity |
|
|
Attempt
|
CL: (1) Dangerous proximity of success (2) intent to commit the targeted offense
MPC: (1) Substantial step (2) intent to bring about result or engage in conduct |
|
|
Attempt Impossibility (only CL)
|
(1) Legal Impossibility: act is not criminal--> not punishable as attempt
(2) Impossibility in fact: D mistaken about a fact relevant to commission-->punishable as attempt |
|
|
Abandonment Defense of Attempt [only MPC]
|
D who completely and voluntarily abandons his criminal purpose is not guilty of attempt
**Cannot be motivated by difficulties, resistance, or increased probability of detection |
|
|
Principle in 1st Degree
|
Commits the act
|
|
|
Principle in 2nd Degree
|
Intentionally assists principle & is present during the commission
|
|
|
An accessory before the fact
|
Intentionally assists in the commission but is not present
|
|
|
An accessory after the fact
|
Helps the principle and accomplices avoid arrest, trial, or conviction
|
