Criminal Law
Kreit
Fall 2011
Actus Reus- Culpable Conduct
A voluntary act that causes social harm.
Martin: The court found that while the appellant may have been drunk in public however since he was taken to the public place by the police officers and thus an accusation of public drunkenness can’t be established because there wasn’t a voluntary act.
The following are not voluntary acts
Reflex or convulsion
Epilepsy: A person was culpably negligent because he consciously undertook to and did operate a motor vehicle. Knew the risk and still took the action so it is voluntary.
Bodily movement during unconscious sleep
Newton: After being shot in the stomach defendant was in state of unconsciousness. Court did not give jury instructions on unconsciousness as a defense.Involuntary acts are never blameworthy. Voluntary acts are not always blameworthy (accidentally, mistakenly, compulsorily, or under duress).
Somnambulism: A mother brutally kills her daughter because while sleep-walking she dreamt there were soldiers on her daughter. She took an ax and struck her daughter with two forceful blows. She voluntarily went to sleep, however she did not commit a voluntary act in the murder of her daughter.
Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion
A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual
Omissions: Subject to a few limited expectations, a person has no criminal law duty to act to prevent harm to another, even if the person imperiled may later lose her life in the absence of assistance.
Omissions: Exceptions to the No-liability Rule
· When there is a duty to act
o Status Relationship: *Parent to Children *Spouse to Spouse *Masters to servants?
o Contractual Obligation: A duty may be created by implied or express contract
o Omissions following an act:
§ Creation of Risk: If wrongfully harms another or property has a common law duty to aid the injured or endangered party.
§ Voluntary Assistance Risk: If one voluntarily assists another in jeopardy, they have a duty to continue to provide aid, at least if a subsequent omission would put the victim in a worse position than if the actor had not initiated.
§ Statutory Duty: There is a statute that says you must act
· Jones v. United States: Ms. Green was paying Jones for caring for her son. Jones had assumed care for the child, when the child died.
o There are four reason in which one could have a legal duty: 1. Statute imposes care. 2. Status relationship w/ one-another. 3. Contractual duty for care. 4. Voluntarily assumed care thus secluding from another’s care. State’s contention was either 3 or 4. Either in a contract with mother or secluded from mother’s care.
Culpability- Mens Rea
Four Key Terms
Purposely- Desires to cause or desires it to happen
Knowingly- (Knowledge to a Substantial Certainty or deliberatively indifferent
Recklessness- Consciously disregards a substantial and unjustified risk
Negligently- Should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk
Rypinski: Gun went off GR: Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact or law is a defense if (a) the ignorance or mistake negatives the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense.
The court found that according to the evidence that the defendant had made a mistake and thus according to the mistake clause he did not have culpability.
Frequently used Mens Rea Terms
Intentionally/ Wilfully: A person intentionally cause harm if (1) it is his desire to cause social harm, or (2) he acts with knowledge that the social harm is virtually certain to occur as a result of his conduct. An act done with a bad purpose; an evil motive
Knowingly or With Knowledge: One has knowledge when he is aware of the fact or correctly believes that the fact exists.
Wilfil Blindness or deliberate ignorance: is aware of of the existence of the fact in question, and fails to investigate, to avoid confirmation of fact.
Jewell: Defendant deliberately avoided positive knowledge of drugs, so he could avoid responsibility if discovered. A court can find willfully blindness is the same as if the defendant knew. The court continues that the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not actually aware because he solely made the decision to avoid learning the truth.
Risk Taking four categories
Desirable or, at least, neutral risk-taking
Risk-taking that justifies civil liability (civil negligence)
Criminal negligent risk-taking (criminal negligence)
Reckless conduct (recklessness)
Negligence: constitutes a deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would have observed.
The gravity of harm that foreseeable would result from defendant’s conduct.
The probability of such harm occurring
The burden-or loss- to the defendant of desisting from the risky conduct. Evaluating why the risk was taken.
Criminal negligence must have more than the same standard in a civil action.
Substantial unjustifiable risk
Gross deviation from the standard
Strict Liability: General Principles
· Strict Liability: do not contain a mens rea requirement regarding one or more elements of the actus reus.
· Strict Liability Used
o The statutory crime is not derived from the common law
o That there is an evident legislative policy that would be undermined by a mens rea requirement
o Standard imposed by the statute is reasonable and adherence can be expected of one person
o The penalty is small
o The conviction does not gravely besmirch
· Garnett: 16Maryland statute does not provide for a mistake of age defense and all surrounding states also do not allow for it when the child is under 14, this becomes a strict liability issue,
· Dott
4. Words: no matter how insulting or offensive.
No cool off time; and left to jury to decide.
Must be a casual link between the provocation, the passion, and the homicide
o Girouard: Court found that mere words were not enough to make murder manslaughter. While provocation a reasonable man would not be prone to kill.
o Maher: Saloon/Ear: Reasonable man would be prone to kill.
Reckless Manslaughter: A killing with the mental state of recklessness. Risk must be substantial and unjustifiable with a gross deviation from the standard. Aware of risk and disregarded risk.
Hall: Defendant, ski instructor, skiing down the hill out of control. Hit and killed the victim.
Involuntary Manslaughter/ Negligent Homicide: Homicide committed in a criminally negligent mental state. Risk must be substantial and unjustifiable with a gross deviation from the standard.
State v. Williams: Sick Baby: Court found that while the risk for death was low, there still was negligence.
Felony Murder Doctrine: death results during the commission of a felony. No mental state required, can be held strictly liable.
People v. Stamp
The felony murder doctrine is not limited to those deaths that are foreseeable.
As long as homicide is direct casual result of felony; felony murder rule applies whether death was natural or probable consequence.
Felony- Murder Rule Misdemeanor- Manslaughter Rule
Statutes:
· When separated by degree of murder only dangerous felonies are 1st degree murder: arson, rape, robbery, & burglary.
· Some states have statutes that have designated certain felonies as murder while the rest are manslaughter: rape, arson, burglary, kidnapping, and robbery
People v. Phillips: Defendant told victim’s family he could heal child by chiropractic methods. The child died. Defendant charged $700.Charged with fraud and felony murder. Court found that the felony-murder rule only applied to felonies that are inherently dangerous.
People v. Stewart: defendant was on a crack binge when infant died. If the jury decides the felony is inherently dangerous then they will convict on the circumstances of the case.
Hines v. State: defendant was a convicted felon. He had a rifle. Thought he saw a turkey 80 feet away through heavy foliage at dusk. Took the shot and hit the victim. The court found that it was inherently dangerous for the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
