Criminal Law Outline
Exam:
Use the material on the review sheets citing the rules and MPC
Use cases to explain ambiguity and compare facts with the hypotheticals on the exam.
Explain requisite facts of the case to compare
2 parts of the exam:
We can use anything we’ve created, Rushin has created, and the book during the exam
Use MPC and majority common law
1. Issue spotter
a. Goal is to answer the question like identify the issues, charges, and defense
2. Policy questions
a. We are thinking about this law, is it good or bad?
b. How coherent can you make a legal argument
Use headings and topic sentences
Take a list of all of the big topics and mark off when you talk about something:
Identify the facts
State the rule
And apply the rule given the factual situations.
I. Why do people break the law? Why do we punish people for breaking the law?
The Offense:
· Has an act requirement and generally a certain mental state which must be demonstrated.
Act Requirement: The statutory definition of an offense must include some proscribed voluntary conduct (actus reus), whether that is an action or an omission to perform a duty.
Mental Element: Most, but not all, statutes require the defendant have a certain mental state to warrant culpability (mens rea). Strict liability crimes require no showing of a culpable mental state.
Proof
Beyond a reasonable doubt: In order to secure a conviction, the U.S. Consitutition requires that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that a defendant committed each element of the statutorily proscribed offense. The prosecutor must prove both the act element (always) and the mental element (if required by the statute) beyond a reasonable doubt.
Defenses:
1. Justification: The defendant can argue that, even though she violated the statute her actions were proper under the circumstances.
2. Excuse: The defendant can argue that, even though she violated the statute, her circumstances or personal characteristics render her blameless.
Considerations of the effects of rule/law:
A. Deterrence, Incapacitation, rehabilitation
B. Retribution, proportionality, Expressive Argument
The Purpose and Limits of Punishment
Definitions:
Utilitarianism: Punishment used to maximize utility of society. Punishments are applied when the bad of the action outweighs the good.
Deterrence: The evil of the punishment must outweigh the advantage of the offense or the less likely someone will be caught, the more severe a punishment must be in order to dissuade someone from acting on a crime. Some crimes that are generally the result of another must be punished more greatly in order to stop the criminal from acting on the greater crime.
Rehabilitation: Is used as a means to contribute to the reformation of the offender not only through fear of being punished again but by a change in character and habits.
Incapacitation: The ability of the criminal to do harm is removed when he is removed from society.
Expressive Argument: Punishment is a conventional device for the expression of attitudes of resentment and indignation and of judgments of disapproval and reprobation on the part of punishing authority.
Retribution: Punishment is justified on the grounds that wrongdoing merits punishment. Punishment imposed as repayment for offense committed. “Vindictive theory.”
Proportionality: Courts analyze the application of precedent cases with similar fact patterns to determine the punishment. The notion of punishment should fit a crime.
II. The Criminal Act
MPC Section 2.01- Requirement of Voluntary Act; Omission as basis of Liability; Possession as an Act
(1) A person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct which includes a voluntary act or omission to perform an act of which he is physically capable.
(2) The following are not voluntary acts within the meaning of this Section:
(a) A reflex or convulsion;
(b) A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep;
(c) Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion;
(d) A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual.
(3) Liability for the commission of an offense may not be based on an omission unaccompanied by action unless:
(a) The omission is expressly made sufficient by the law defining the offense; or
(b) A duty to perform the omitted act is otherwise imposed by law.
(4) Possession is an act, within the meaning of this Section, if the possessor knowingly procured or received the thing possessed or was aware of his control thereof for sufficient period to have been able to terminate his possession.
-The “act” requirement mandates that all punishment be for (1) past, (2) voluntary, (3) wrongful, (4) conduct, (5) specified, (6) in advance, (7) by a statute.
· Every word represents a section up to this point.
Disproportionality- How does the court interpret cruel and unusual punishment?
· Interpreted as disproportional
trary purpose plainly appears.
5. Substitutes for Negligence, Recklessness and Knowledge. When the law provides that negligence suffices to establish an element of an offense, such element also is established if a person acts purposely, knowingly or recklessly. When recklessness suffices to establish an element, such element also is established if a person acts purposely or knowingly. When acting knowingly suffices to establish and element, such element also is established if a person acts purposely.
6. Requirement of Purpose Satisfied if Purpose Is Conditional. When a particular purpose is an element of an offense, the element is established although such purpose is conditional, unless the condition negatives the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense.
7. Requirement of Knowledge Satisfied by Knowledge of High Probability. When knowledge of the existence of a particular fact is an element of an offense, such knowledge is established if a person is aware of a high probability of its existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist.
8. Requirement of Willfulness Satisfied by Acting Knowingly. A requirement that an offense be committed willfully is satisfied if a person acts knowingly with respect to the material elements of the offense, unless a purpose to impose further requirements appears.
9. Culpability as to Illegality of Conduct. Neither knowledge nor recklessness or negligence as to whether conduct constitutes an offense or as to the existence, meaning or application of the law determining the elements of an offense is an element of such offense, unless the definition of the offense or the Code so provides.
10. Culpability as Determinant of Grade of Offense. When the grade or degree of an offense depends on whether the offense is committed purposely, knowing, recklessly or negligently, its grade or degree shall be the lowest for which the determinative kind of culpability is established with respect to any material element of the offense.
