Criminal Law Outline
Stacy
Table of Contents
Purposes of Criminal Punishment……………………………………………………………………… 4
Questions Addressed……………………………………………………………………………. 4
Schools of Thought……………………………………………………………………………… 4
Utilitarian View…………………………………………………………………………. 4
Retributivist View……………………………………………………………………….. 4
Differences Between the 2 Views……………………………………………………… 4
Cases………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
Basic Points………………………………………………………………………………. 6
Basic Principles of Capital Punishment………………………………………………………………. 6
Act (Actus Reus)………………………………………………………………………………… 6
Voluntariness……………………………………………………………………………. 6
Omissions…………………………………………………………………………………. 6
Attendant Circumstances……………………………………………………………………… 7
Culpability……………………………………………………………………………………….. 7
MPC Classification……………………………………………………………………… 7
Purposeful Action……………………………………………………………….. 7
Knowing Action………………………………………………………………….. 7
Reckless Action………………………………………………………………….. 7
Negligence………………………………………………………………………… 8
Strict Liability Offenses (No Required Culpability)……………………….. 8
Factors Influencing Required Culpability…………………………………………… 8
Hypos……………………………………………………………………………………… 9
Cases………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
General v. Specific Intent………………………………………………………………. 9
Concurrence of Act and Culpability…………………………………………………………. 10
Result……………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
Causal Link Between Act/Culpability and Result………………………………………….. 10
Offenses Against the Person…………………………………………………………………………… 10
Homicide…………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
Generally………………………………………………………………………………… 10
Common Law Classifications…………………………………………………………… 10
Murder……………………………………………………………………………. 11
Manslaughter……………………………………………………………………. 11
Modern Law Classifications…………………………………………………………… 11
Murder……………………………………………………………………………. 11
Manslaughter……………………………………………………………………. 12
General Murder Hypos…………………………………………………………………. 12
1st Degree Premeditated Murder……………………………………………………… 13
Ordinary Meaning Approach…………………………………………………… 13
Relaxed Definition………………………………………………………………. 14
Middle Ground (Kansas)……………………………………………………….. 14
Hypos……………………………………………………………………………… 14
Heat of Passion Voluntary Manslaughter………………………………………….. 15
Definition…………………………………………………………………………. 15
Adequate Provocation………………………………………………………….. 15
Classifications of Unintentional Killings…………………………………………… 17
Depraved Heart Murder………………………………………………………… 17
Reckless Involuntary Manslaughter………………………………………… 17
Felony Murder Rule…………………………………………………………….. 20
Unlawful Act Involuntary Manslaughter………………………………….. 25
Accomplice Liability…………………………………………………………………………………….. 26
Generally………………………………………………………………………………………… 26
Functions of Accomplice Liability…………………………………………………………….. 26
Elements………………………………………………………………………………………….. 26
Act………………………………………………………………………………………… 26
Mens Rea………………………………………………………………………………….. 26
Result……………………………………………………………………………………… 27
Cases………………………………………………………………………………………………. 27
Hypos………………………………………………………………………………………………. 28
Conspiracy………………………………………………………………………………………………… 28
Elements………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28
Rationales………………………………………………………………………………………… 28
Prosecutorial Advantages…………………………………………………………………….. 28
The Agreement (Act)…………………………………………………………………………….. 29
Theories for Conspiracy………………………………………………………………… 29
Wharton Rule……………………………………………………………………………. 29
Legislatively Protected Class………………………………………………………… 29
Co-Conspirators…………………………………………………………………………. 29
To Achieve an Unlawful Criminal Objective (Mens Rea)…………………………………… 29
Corrupt Motive Doctrine………………………………………………………………. 30
Commission of Overt Act……………………………………………………………….. 30
Scope of Conspiracy……………………………………………………………………………… 30
Important For……………………………………………………………………………. 30
2 Types of Conspiracies………………………………………………………………….. 30
Termination………………………………………………………………………………. 31
Cases………………………………………………………………………………………. 31
Other Crimes Liability………………………………………………………………………….. 31
Conspirators Liable for Other Offenses……………………………………………… 31
Kansas Provision………………………………………………………………………… 31
Pinkerton Doctrine……………………………………………………………………… 31
Attempts………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 32
Generally………………………………………………………………………………………… 32
Elements………………………………………………………………………………………….. 32
Mental State…………………………………………………………………………….. 32
Act…………………………………………………………………………………………. 32
The Defense of Impossibility……………………………………………………………………. 32
Factual v. Legal Impossibility…………………………………………………………. 32
Cases………………………………………………………………………………………………. 33
Defenses…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Generally………………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Self Defense……………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Imminence…………………………………………………………………………………. 34
Imperfect Self Defense………………………………………………………………….. 34
Initial Aggressors……………………………………………………………………….. 34
Duress……………………………………………………………………………………………… 35
Basic Idea…………………………………………………………………………………. 35
Common Law elements…………………………………………………………………… 35
Application to Felony Murder………………………………………………………… 35
MPC Approach……………………………………………………………………………. 36
Kansas Provision………………………………………………………………………… 36
Intoxication……………………………………………………………………………………… 36
Involuntary Intoxication……………………………………………………………… 36
Voluntary Intoxication………………………………………………………………… 36
Insanity…………………………………………………………………………………………… 36
General Rule…………………………………………………………………………….. 36
Tests……………………………………………………………………………………….. 36
M’Naghten Test………………………………………………………………….. 36
Volitional/Irresistible Impulse Test………………………………………….. 36
MPC Test………………………………………………………………………….. 36
Mistake of Law…………………………………………………………………………………… 37
2 Types……………………………………………………………………………………… 37
Mistake as to the Existence/Meaning of the Offense……………………….. 37
Mistake as to the Meaning of Collateral Concept W/Offense……………. 37
Mistake of Fact………………………………………………………………………………….. 37
2 Step Inquiry…………………………………………………………………………….. 37
Criminal Law Outline
I. Purposes of Criminal Punishment
a. Questi
0,000 fine would barely be adequate (1% of that is $10,000) – punishment should be adjusted to reflect the probability that offenders of the kind will not be apprehended…harsher penalties when probability of apprehension is low.
b. Retributivist – Focus only on the wrong the particular offender has committed.
iv. Cases
1. The Queen v. Dudley & Stevens (12) – 4 men shipwrecked and on lifeboat, 2 decide to kill the weakest, a 17 year old, to live off of after 20 days. 3 days after the killing they are rescued and charged with murder.
a. All elements of murder are satisfied, but Δs argued necessity killing…that if they didn’t kill one person all 4 would die.
b. Utilitarian view might allow this b/c at least some people were saved.
c. Retributivist view would not allow this b/c autonomy violated.
2. Conjoined Twins Case (15) – 2 twins joined at birth, one basically supporting another. If separation surgery is performed, one would die but the other would live. If no surgery, both would eventually die. Same analysis as Dudley & Stevens
3. The War Against Drugs
a. Utilitarian View – What are the benefits/costs of criminalization? For proponents of legalization?
i. Benefits of legalization:
1. Diminishes prices b/c search prices are so high
2. Quality is regulated; You know what you are getting
a. Saving lives
b. Possibly helping reduce costs to users
3. Might reduce crime – users ≠ have to pay as much to support habit, so they don’t have to commit crimes to get money
4. Get rid of the law enforcement, judicial, imprisonment, coast guard enforcement costs, etc.
5. Helps keep families together…lots of people are incarcerated for drugs
b. Retributivist/Kantian View
i. Basic argument in favor of legalization:
1. Retributivist – respect for the rationale autonomy of persons
a. People have the right to do what they want with their body as long as it doesn’t harm others.
b. One response to the fact that people cause harm to others is to make drugs illegal. Another view is instead of prohibiting drugs, just punish the harm.
c. Situation where someone takes an addictive drug, becomes addicted, wants to kick the habit but is unable to do so…infringement on autonomy.
v. Basic Points – Understand the following about Utilitarian/Retributivist:
1. Basic idea of the 2 theories
2. That the two theories generate different analysis and sometimes different results (Dudley & Stevens and Conjoined Twins).
3. Theories are useful in producing arguments about:
a. How ambiguities in the law ought to be resolved (e.g. is necessity an adequate defense to homicide?).
b. The appropriate sentence.
c. When existing law ought to change.
II. Basic Principles of Criminal Punishment
a. Act (“Actus Reus”) – To constitute a crime, there must be an action or an omission to act where a legal duty exists to constitute a crime. Bad thoughts alone are not enough
i. Voluntariness
1. The act must be a voluntary movement that is the product of human will.
a. If you are shoved into someone, ≠ liable for battery.
2. We do not punish involuntary actions, such as:
a. Reflexes or convulsions
