Criminal Law
Fall 2006
Crime:
Involves public law
Causes social harm “a breach and violation of the public rights and duties due to the whole community in its societal aggregate capacity.
A person convicted of a crime is punished.
Distinguished from civil law by punishment. The societal condemnation and stigma that accompanies the conviction
Punishment:
Utilitarianism – Both crime and punishment are unpleasant; therefore, the pain inflicted by punishment is justifiable only if it is expected to result in a reduction in the pain of crime that would otherwise occur.
Threat or imposition of punishment can reduce crime because human beings act reasonably and hedonistically.
Deterrence by incapacitation
Deterrence by intimidation
Retributivism – Looks backward and justifies punishment solely on the basis of voluntary commission of a crime. Humans possess freewill so they may be blamed for choices that violate the moors of society.
Gratifies the desire for revenge that would otherwise be satisfied through personal vengeance.
The hatred of the victim for the criminal means the victim respects himself.
Punishment is a means of securing moral balance.
Denunciation – Expresses society’s condemnation.
Actus Reus: Physical, external portion of a crime
Three ingredients of a crime
1. Voluntary Act
2. That Causes
3. Social Harm
COMMON LAW vs. MPC
Voluntary Act (Including Possession)
Voluntary Act – §1.13(2) & §2.01(1) & (2)
Omission
Omission – §2.01(3)
Possession – §2.01(4)
[Voluntary]-[Acts] (I raised my arm) – Every criminal act requires a voluntary act
§ Act – A muscular contraction of the human body, bodily movement, physical behavior
§ Voluntary- that is, in some minimal sense, willed or directed by the actor. Generally, it is volitional conduct.
a. A voluntary act can also be the result of habit or even inadvertence as long as the individual could have behaved differently.
b. Possession can be a voluntary act. Possession, or the failure to terminate possession once the Δ learns of the item’s presence, is sufficient. Constructive Possession is also found to be a voluntary act. This is where the Δ may have not exercised physical dominion and control over the item, but the proximity to the item or the Δ ability to gain control or dominion over the item is sufficient.
§ Involuntary Act (my arm came up) – An act which the individual had no conscious control.
· Acts done while unconscious, sleepwalking, or acts resulting from physical causes such as an epileptic seizure or other uncontrollable spasm, bodily movements caused by being struck by another person or object
· The law does not punish involuntary movement because it cannot deter involuntary movement. If the person acts involuntarily, it is as if no act occurred.
COMMON LAW &MPC if there is at least onevoluntary act the Δ may be criminally liable if the voluntary act is a proximate or actual cause.
· Time Framing – The prosecution does not need to show that every act or even the last act was voluntary in order to establish criminal liability. It is sufficient to say the ∆’s conduct included a voluntary act.
§ Craig gets drunk in a private club and gets thrown onto the street by Mr. French. He can be arrested for public drunkenness b/c of time framing. He went out on street invol
to the hospital
§ Creation of Risk – e.g. someone who pushes another who cannot swim into a deep lake
§ Duty to control the conduct of another – e.g. an owner of a car have a duty to prevent the company chauffeur from speeding
§ Duty of a landowner – e.g. a theater owner has a duty to provide reasonable emergency exits for his patrons.
§ Omissions Following an Act
We normally do not impose a legal obligation because:
§ Omission is more ambiguous than an act … it’s harder to determine motives and culpability
§ Difficult to draw lines with problems arise in omission cases … where do we say you are criminally liable … Think Kitty Genovese … are we to haul in all 38 of them?
§ Well-meaning bystanders often make matters worse by intervening.
§ We are obliged not to harm others, we are not forced to lend benefit.
§ Causation is harder to prove
§ Would backlog the legal system
§ Act and Omission are not symmetrical
MPC Omission – §2.01(3) Like the COMMON LAW, the MPC permits an omission or failure to act to satisfy the conduct element of a crime in two different types of cases:
(a) the omission is expressly made sufficient by the law defining the offense [when the statute defining the offense expressly states that failure to act is a crime] or
(b) a duty to perform the omitted act is otherwise imposed by [civil] law.
