Select Page

Criminal Law
University of Illinois School of Law
Leipold, Andrew D.

Criminal Law ~ Leipold

I. THE CRIMINAL ACT

I. The Criminal Act (Actus Reus)
Section 1: The Conduct (ACT) Requirement
Doe v. City of Lafayette
Fact Summary: City of Lafayette banned Doe, a convicted sex offender, from all city property for
life. Doe sued on ground that ban violated his 1st amendment rights, but district court granted city’s
motion for summary judgment. Doe appealed.
Rule of Law: A citizen’s immoral thoughts w/o action are not constitutionally sufficient to support a ban from a city’s public property.

The Requirement of Conduct
Crime definition – in Doe there must be some level of conduct.

Actus Reus – The criminal act.

I caused a death of another

Mens rea – state of mind

I wanted to kill this person

Absense of Justification or excuse

No justification or excuse

Actus Reus
o Conduct
· Act: Breaking and entering, Taking and carrying away
· Omission: Failure to act. – ex: don’t feed children
· Possession: Have the illegal property
o Circumstances
o Result: Homocide – death of another. What has to actually occur to satisfy actus reus of a crime.

Quantitative – how much conduct do you need to make a crime? Comes into area of intent
Qualitative – not enough to do something. It has to be a VOLUNTARY act. See Martin v. State

Martin v. State *MPC*
Martin, after being arrested at his home, was taken by officers on to the highway, where he manifested
drunken condition.
Rule of law: Criminal liability must be based on conduct which includes a voluntary act or omission to act which was physically possible to have performed.
.
Hypos: Man loses job, no money to buy medicine to dying child. Legal duty to care for children. After all options failed, decides to steal medicine. Even though choice is difficult, its still a choice. NOT an involuntary act.

Voluntary Act Doctrine *Common Law / MPC*
a. A voluntary act is an act done by a person’s own free will
b. Categories of Involuntary Conduct (acts or omissions are not directed by any conscious metal process)
i. Physically Coerced Movement (i.e. If A pushes B into C, B’s act is involuntary)
ii. Reflex Movement (i.e. If A hits B with his car after he is attacked by a swarm of bees, A’s act is involuntary)
iii. Muscular Contraction or Paralysis Produced by Disease (i.e. If A does not have control over his limbs, A’s act is involuntary)
iv. Unconsciousness (i.e. If A rolls over onto her child and smothers it, A’s act is involuntary)
c. Categories of Impaired Consciousness
i. Occurs when a person may unconsciously do what would have been consciously controlled
ii. Some courts have found this type of conduct to be involuntary
iii. Examples: Concussion, Somnambulism (sleepwalking & “night terrors”), Hypoglycemia (abnormally low blood sugar)
d. Factors to Distinguish Voluntary from Involuntary Acts
i. Likelihood that the involuntary act will occur
ii. Knowledge about the involuntary act
iii. Surroundings of the involuntary act

IMPORTANT – if not voluntary act, then NOT LIABLE. If it IS, then not necessarily so, depending on other defendant charged w/possessing drugs on premises of county correctional facility? Like Martin v. State. Yes I have drugs, but involuntarily in jail.
· A person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act of which he is physically capable.

MODEL PENAL CODE
Article 2. General Principles of Liability
Section 2.01. Requirement of Voluntary Act; Omission as Basis of Liability; Possession as an Act.

A person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act of which he is physically capable.

The following are not voluntary acts with the meaning of this Section:

A reflex or convulsion;

A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep;

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.

Q: Fainting while driving hypo. Variables are looking at are:
likelihood of condition occuring?
Nature of condition? Is there historic risk or just a possibility?
Warning: Need to take meds hypo: not taking consititutes voluntarily not taking meds increases likelihood.
THESE INCLUDE VOLUNTARY CONDUCT WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO LIKELIHOOD.

Robinson v. Powell case involved with drug addiction, puts limitations on voluntary doctrine.
Point of argument is you can’t punish for status.

Assignment #2: 80-106 (principle of legality, vagueness); MPC §1.05
Section 2: The Requirement That Offenses Be Previously Defined
MODEL PENAL CODE
Part 1. General Provisions, Article 1. Preliminary
Section 1.05. All Offenses Defined by Statute; Application of General Provisions of the Code

No conduct constitutes an offense unless it is a crime or violation under this Code or another statute of this State.

The provisions of Part I of the Code are applicable to offenses defined by other statutes, unless the code otherwise provides.

This Section odes not affect the power of a court to punish for contempt or to employ any sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of tan order of a civil judgment or decree.

1. The Principle of Legality *Common Law*
a. Forbids the retroactive crime definition.
b. States that no one should be punished for a crime that has not been so defined in advance by the appropriate authority (i.e legislature)
c. Several states occasionally enforce non-statutory offenses which is not perceived as a violation of this principle so long as it is based on prior precedent in common law
d. Instructs police that they can arrest for specific things rather than undefined premises. e. Limiting power of law enforcement.. Prevents harassment of unpopular groups
f. Desireability of advanced crime def’n.
g. Prevention of arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.

Rex v. Manley *Common Law*
Fact summary: manley was convicted of filing a false police report. Claims not public mischief.
Rule of law: an individual may be criminally liable for filing a false police report.
Note: A public mischief is any act which tends to prejudice the community (i.e. wasting police reso

nd Control ~ control or exercise of control of object or where object is found
b. Example: A driver is responsible unless another person can be identified
c. Example: Drugs found in home I own but I’m not present and no one else has access.

Section 2.01. Requirement of Voluntary Act; Omission as Basis of Liability; Possession as an Act.

Liability for the commission of an offense may not be based on an omission unaccompanied by action unless:

The omission is expressly made sufficient by the law defining the offense; or

A duty to perform the omitted act is otherwise imposed by law.

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 a sufficient period to have been able to terminate his possession.

II. THE CRIMINAL MIND (Mens Rea)

A. Categories of Mens Rea
1. Common Law
a. Specific Intent
i. Requires intent to accomplish the precise criminal act that one is later charged with
ii. Includes crimes requiring
1. Purpose
2. Knowledge
b. General Intent
i. Requires actual awareness of the risk and the culpable taking of that risk or blameworthy advertence
ii. Includes crimes requiring:
1. Recklessness (Cunningham, or shooting gun in air as celebration)
2. Negligence (Falkner, ex: driving while tired)
c. Strict Liability
i. Requires breach of an absolute duty to make something safe
ii. Does not require actual negligence or intent to harm
1. ex: statutory rape, speeding (state of mind doesn’t matter)
What the rule is depends on general intent or specific intent. Importance in C/L

Regina v. Faulkner *Common Law*
Facts: Faulkner inadvertently caused a fire when he tried to steal from a cask of rum
Rule: A defendant is malicious and held liable if the criminal act was intended, if it was a probable consequence of the conduct, if risk was foreseen, or if the risk could have reasonably been foreseen
Note: This case establishes that “feloniously, unlawfully, and maliciously” will be the requirement for the mens rea element

Regina v. Cunningham *Common Law*
Facts: Charged with unlawfully and maliciously administering poison gas.
Malice: Intent (to poison neighbor), Recklessness (as to what harm may occur)
Actual foresight of risk – D recognized risk and went for it.-different because he PERCEIVES risk of it, rather than C/L which ‘should’ have foreseen. You have to LEAD jury that he ACTUALLY foresaw it by proving it inferentially based on x factors. MPC throws