Professor Bretz
Fall 2008
Criminal Law Outline
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose of the Criminal Law
1. Deterrence
a. General deterrence a goal of criminal law generally, or of a specific conviction and sentence, to discourage people from committing crimes
b. Specific deterrence a goal of a specific conviction and sentence to dissuade the offender from committing crimes in the future.
2. Incapacitation the action of disabling or depriving of legal capacity.
3. Rehabilitation the process of seeking to improve a criminal’s character and outlook so that he or she can function in society without committing other crimes.
4. Retribution Punishment imposed as repayment or revenge for the offense committed; requital.
-Kant’s beliefs that a just punishment is based on the crime the person has committed and that the punishment must fit the criminal’s wrongdoing.
B. Role of the Courts
Trial Court: fact finder
Appellate Court not fact finder; review case in light of the appellant, assuming all evidence is there, proof beyond a reasonable doubt
C. Crime Classifications
1. Felonies – Possible penalties of more than one year these victimizes people. (malam prohibita)
“Mens Rea” – Wrongful mental state/Guilty Mind (Culpability)
“Actus Reus” – Physical/Guilty Act
2. Misdemeanors – Possible penalties of one year or less (malam ensae)
“Mens Rea” – Wrongful mental state/Guilty Mind (Culpability)
“Actus Reus” – Physical/Guilty Act
“Mens Rea”
“Culpability”– Common law offenses did not specify any mens rea. It was defined broadly in terms of moral blameworthiness or culpability. It was and is sufficient to prove that the defendant acted with a general culpable state of mind, without the need to demonstrate a specific state of mind such as “intentionally,” “knowingly,” or “recklessly.”
“Purposely” – In the context of a result or conduct, a person acts “purposely” if it is his “conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result.”A person acts “purposely” with respect to attendant circumstances (element of the offense) if he “is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist.”
“Knowingly” – The defendant “is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.” With “attendant circumstances” and “conduct” elements, one acts “knowingly” if he is “aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such [attendant] circumstances exist. Furthermore, the Code states that knowledge is established, if “a person is aware of a high probability of . . . [the attendant circumstance’s] existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist.”
“Recklessly” and “Negligently” – “consciously disregards a substantial and unjustified risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct.”
(i) “substantial and unjustifiable” – “considering the nature and purpose of the defendant’s conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct of a reasonable person would observe in the actor’s situation.”
(ii) “negligent” – “should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct.”
(iii) “negligence” and “recklessness,” require the same degree of risk-taking.
1. Difference between them lies in the fact that the reckless defendant “consciously disregards” the risk, whereas the negligent defendant’s risk-taking is lack of care.
“Elemental”– Much more prevalent today is a narrow definition which refers to the particular mental state set is an element of the crime.
Note that a person can be morally blameworthy yet lack the requisite elemental mens rea.
“Intentionally” – A person “intentionally” causes the social harm of an offense if:
it is his desire (i.e., his conscious object) to cause the social harm; or
he acts with knowledge that the social harm is virtually certain to occur as a result of his conduct.
“Knowingly” or “With Knowledge” – A person who knowingly causes a particular result or knowingly engages in a specific conduct is commonly said to have intended the harmful result of conduct
Material of fact is known if:
Aware of the fact
Correctly believe that fact exists
Willful blindness/”Deliberate Ignorance”
Material of the facts are known if:
Aware of high probability of the existence of the fact in question; and
Deliberately failing to investigate in order to avoid conformation of the fact
“Willfully” – “Willful” has been held in different jurisdictions to be synonymous with other terms, e.g., “intentional,””an act done with a bad purpose,” “an evil motive,”or “a purpose to disobey the law.”
“Negligence” – (Criminal negligence) A gro
10. Mistake of fact
11. Mistake of law (in very limited circumstances)
Transferred Intent – Intending to kill (or injure) one person, accidentally kills (or injures) another person instead.
“Actus Reus” the physical aspect of the criminal activity.
A voluntary act that causes social harm.
Burden of Proof – Prosecutor bears the burden and does not need to show that every act was voluntary in order to establish culpability.It is sufficient that the defendant’s conduct – which is the actual and proximate cause of the social harm – includeda voluntary act.
The term generally includes
Voluntary Act
1. “Act” – An act that involves physical behavior.
a. No “Mens Rea” is present
2. “Voluntary” – Done by design or intention.
a. Habitual acts may be deemed voluntary
b. Involuntary (may include): spasms, seizures, and bodily movements while unconscious or asleep.
Causes
Chain links (i.e. A to B and then c occurs)
Social Harm – wrongful conduct, wrongful results, or both
“Conduct” Elements (or “Conduct” Crimes) – Some crimes establish social harm in terms of conduct, irrespective (without regard to something else) of any harmful results, (i.e. driving under the influence of alcohol.)
“Result” Elements (or “Result” Crimes) – An offense may be defined in terms of a prohibited result. For example, murder is a “result” crime, because the social harm is the death of another human being, irrespective of the nature of the conduct that resulted in such death (e.g., whether the death occurred by shooting, stabbing, or poisoning).
Combined “Result” and “Conduct” Elements – Some offenses contain both “conduct” and “result” elements. For example, a statute may define first-degree murder as the killing of another human (the result) by means of a destructive device or explosive (the conduct).
HOMICIDE “the killing of a human being by another human being”
