CRIMINAL LAW
BASIC PRINCIPLES
We only punish for conduct that includes a voluntary act that ACTUALLY & PROXIMATELY causes social harm that is performed with a morally culpable state of mind.
Definition of a crime: conduct, which shown to have taken place, incurs the formal and solemn pronouncement of the moral condemnation of the community
Every crime consists of: Actus Reus + Mens Rea + Causation – Defenses = Crime
For MC look & see what she is asking for. This is a hierarchy; want to see if you can knock out one of these to get the correct answer.
Elements of a Crime Defined:
A. Actus Reus: the voluntary act that caused the social harm
B. Mens Rea: the morally blameworthy state of mind/the specific mental state
Ex.: (defined diff. than torts.) (this is a highest to lowest scale)
Model Penal Code 2.02
· Purpose – both knowledge that the requisite external circumstances exist, and it is the actor’s conscious object to perform an action or cause a result
· Knowledge – just knowledge of the requisite external circumstances (aware that it is practically certain that conduct will cause a result); willfully means knowingly
· Recklessness – consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk
· Negligence – should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk (failure to do so must result from a gross deviation of reasonable standard of care
C. Causation: the factual cause, also known as the but-for test, and the proximate or legal cause, also known as the substantial factor test. (Have to consider foreseeability and intervening v. superceding)
D. Defenses: defendant can be acquitted due to this, even if all the above elements are proved. A justification is an act that society condones, such as self-defense, defense of others, defense of property, and necessity. An excuse just means that the defendant is not morally blameworthy, such as insanity, intoxication, and diminished capacity.
Theories of Punishment:
A. Retribution: “Eye for an eye.” Punishment imposed based on societal revenge by giving the defendant just deserts. Theory: Humans possess free will to choose right from wrong, so when they choose to do wrong they owe a debt to society and punishment is a payment of debt. Punishes proportionally: looks at harm caused and moral blameworthiness for causing crime.
B. Restitution: making the defendant pay back for any monetary harm the victim has incurred as a result of the defendant’s crime.
C. Utilitarianism: looks at the useful purposes that punishment serves and employs a balancing test, where punishment is imposed only if the benefits of imposing the punishment outweigh the cost. Mostly deals with the theory that humans are rational beings who learn from their mistakes. The following 3 fall under this:
Ø Incapacitation: keeping the defendant in prison so that he has lesser opportunities to commit more crimes, and to keep him away from the rest of society.
Ø Rehabilitation: correct the defendant’s behavior by giving him opportunities, through programs, to reform his conduct according to society’s norms so that he does not commit any future crimes.
Ø Specific Deterrence: punishment of the individual to specifically deter him from committing any future crimes
Ø General Deterrence: punishment of the individual in order to deter
ted to persons or things similar to those specifically enumerated
2. Statutory Structure: a statute is to be considered in all its parts when construing any one of them
3. Statutory Amendment: a statute should be construed to be consistent with subsequent statutory amendments
Legislative History: when the plain language and canons of statutory interpretation fail to resolve statutory ambiguity, we will resort to legislative history
Rule of Lenity: if a statute is ambiguous (go through all of the statutory interpretation rules and still ambiguous) and is capable of two different interpretations, the court goes with the interpretation that favors the defendant. The ambiguity is resolved in the defendant’s favor, as criminal statutes are strictly construed against the government.
As a WHOLE ANY statutory interpretation SHALL ULTIMATELY AVOID ABSURD RESULTS
FOLLOWING IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
Ø Ex post facto laws: the legislature is forbidden by the constitution to retroactively apply laws in these circumstances:
1. Making an act criminal that at the time it was done it was not criminal
2. Aggravating a crime or increasing the punishment for it
3. Changing the rules of evidence to the defendant’s detriment
4. Altering a criminal procedure rule to deprive the defendant of a substantive right.
