Criminal Law Outline

Actus Reus        [top]  
1.      The Act Requirement
a.       Crimes of Possession
                                                              i.      Maldonado
1.      Actual possession is not needed for a conviction
a.       Only need “constructive possession”
                                                            ii.      Voluntary action not necessary
1.      Exception: If forcibly brought somewhere
b.      Status Crimes
                                                              i.      Can’t be punished for “status crimes.”
1.      Ex: Addict/Gay/Truant
                                                            ii.      Ex: A crime of DIP is for being drunk in public, not for being an alcoholic. This is OK. If the crime was for being an alcoholic in public, NOT OK.
c.       Act Needs to be Enumerated
                                                              i.      No “common law” of crimes. There needs to be a statute that says something I a crime.
d.      The Act Required Needs to be Clear
                                                              i.      Chicago v. Morales
1.      There needs to be a clear line as to what a crime is and what isn’t.
 
Mens Rea           [top]  
1.      Common Law
a.       Crimes of Malice
                                                              i.      Intent
1.      Purpose—Conscious objective
2.      Knowledge— Δ disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that he aware of. Differs from MPC in that no “gross deviation” from the reasonable man required.
                                                            ii.      Recklessness
1.      Consciously Created Risk
a.       Conscious disregard of risk or gross deviation from reasonable man standard
                                                          iii.      Negligence
1.      Inadvertent Risk Creation
a.       Gross deviation from reasonable man standard
                                                          iv.      Strict Liability
1.      Morisette—Determining S/L or MR
a.       Language of statute, leg. hist., severity of penalty, purpose/origins of statute, effective enforcement of the law.
2.      Mala in se (crimes that are crimes because of their abhorrent nature) require a mental state.
3.      Malum Prohibitum crimes don’t require a MR because S/L is allowed in the interest of protecting the public.
4.      Don’t automatically assume S/L, read MR in if you have to.
5.      Can’t gravely besmirch a person.
b.      Rule of Statutory Construction—When a MR is specified, you apply it across the board to all elements where a MR is not specified.
c.       Transferred Intent—Liability to Δ who intending to kill or injure one person, accidentally kills or injures another.
                                                              i.      Exception: If statute requires intent to be at person
d.      Willful Blindness—Equally culpable as knowledge. Δ must be aware of a “high probability of existence.”
e.       Specific Intent Crimes
                                                              i.      Need to satisfy MR for the prohibited act, plus an additional act.
1.      Burglary you need to enter… but you also need the specific intent to steal.
2.      MPC Approach
a.       Purpose—Was the conscious obj. of the defendant to cause the result?
b.      Knowledge—The defendant must have known that the result could be a probable certainty. Doesn’t require actual knowledge, merely that it was a probably certainty.
c.       Recklessness—A person acts recklessly when they consciously disregard a substantial risk that their conduct will cause a particular result.
d.      Negligently—Fails to recognize a substantial and unjustifiable risk he is engaging in this conduct
e.       Strict Liability—No strict liability for crimes. Only allowed for non-criminal conduct.
f.       Default Rule—If there is no mens rea requirement in the statute, apply a mens rea requirement of recklessness.
 
Homicide            [top]  
Intentional Homicide                 [top]  
1.      Common Law
a.      Murder
                                                              i.      An unjustified killing manifesting
                                                            ii.      Mens Rea: (1) purpose to cause death; (2) intent to inflict serious bodily harm; or (3) extreme recklessness with respect to the serious risk of harm to others life, where the risky action manifests so unworthy or immoral a purpose as to suggest callous indifference to human life; or (4) under the felony-murder rule, a willingness to undertake even a very small risk of death where the risky action manifests so unworthy as to establish guilt of a serious felony.
b.      Voluntary Manslaughter
                                                              i.      Murder that is committed with legally adequate provocation and done so in the heat of passion.
1.      Legally adequate provocation is
a.       Overly exercising self-defense leads to a killing; not murder but manslaughter.
b.      Adultery (Heat of Passion)
                                                            ii.      Limitations to provocation
1.      Cooling time
a.       Time period between the provocation and the killing must not have been such that a reasonable person would have cooled off.
c.       Imperfect Self-Defense etc…
d.      Felony Murder
                                                              i.      “Any death occurring during the course of an inherently dangerous felony is murder” (dangerous felonies can be enumerated in felony-murder statutes or imputed by courts)
                                                            ii.      Problem with felony murder is causation is overly broad. Theories for determining causation.
1.      Proximate Cause
a.       We don’t care how the person died because somebody died as a result of something that occurred during the course of a felony. Who caused the death is irrelevant; it will count for felony-murder if it was part of the felony.
2.      Agency Theo