DEFINTION
What is the Presumption of Innocence Doctrine? Explain the principles.
*hint they're 3 principles*
In the absence of proof of guilt, the defendant is presumed innocent. "innocent until proven guilty"
3 principles:
1. prosecution bears the burden of proving a crime
2. proving a crime= proving all material elements
3. standard of proof= proof beyond a reasonable doubt
What is the rule that addresses the burden of the prosecution/the state?
*hint it comes from Patterson v. NY*
It is the requirement of the state to prove every element of a case Beyond a reasonable doubt and the defense may be required to prove an affirmative defense.
(Due process allows a state to place on def.the burden of proof for an affirmative defense UNLESS doing so places on def. the burden of disproving an essential element of the crime)
Define Murder (under both common law + MPC)
(COMMON LAW) Murder- unlawful killing of another human being with malice [aforethought] Malice= “mens rea element’
(MPC) Murder- causes death of another purposely or knowingly
Define Involuntary Manslaughter and its elements.
Killing committed with recklessness or killing committed with criminal (gross/culpable) negligence or killing during the commission of an unlaw act not amounting to a felony (“misdemeanor manslaughter)
Recklessness- involves the defendant’s awareness of the possibility that his or her behavior will cause a prohibited result “risk-taking” behavior- The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation.
Negligence- declares that he should have been aware of the risk his “failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him
Explain Principles of Legality and each category.
*hint they're five*
"No crime without law, no punishment without law
1. Written Statute- written statute prohibiting conduct, announced publicly and enacted prior to the defendant's conduct
2. Retroactivity-"Ex Post Facto"; "Enacting the prohibition after the defendant has committed the crime robs the citizen of any chance to conform his behavior
3. Interpreting Statutes and the Common Law
4. Vagueness
5.The Rule of Lenity- ruling in favor of the defendant due to ambiguity of the statue
What is the rule that addresses sufficiency of evidence?
*hint it's from 2 cases: In re Winship + Owen v. State*
Case: Owen v. State: (Rule) Circumstantial evidence is enough for a person to be convicted of a crime unless the circumstances are inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis
Case: In re Winship: (Rule) No individual may be convicted of a crime unless the prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt each and every element of the crime
What is meant by implied malice (consider People v. Knoller) & express malice? What are the 4 types of malice?
Express malice- involves the commission of a crime, such as murder, with the deliberate intention to bring about the victim’s death
Implied malice- Where Def. engages in conduct (for antisocial motive, possibly) which involves a high probability of death and Def. consciously disregards that risk to life
4 Types of malice:
Intent to kill (express malice)
Intent to inflict serious/grievous bodily injury (express malice)
Depraved heart or abandon and malignant heart [i.e., a high degree of recklessness] (implied malice)
In commission of a felony: BARRK felonies (BURGLARY, ARSON, ROBBERY, RAPE, KIDNAPPING)
Define Manslaughter under MPC.
Recklessly
Under circumstance that would be murder BUT defendant was under influence of extreme mental/emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation/excuse
Explain specific vs. general intent
General intent usually means the mens rea is associated with the act [def. intended to engage in or was aware of engaging in the condition] E.g. assault, rape, arson ”depraved heart’ killing
Specific intent usually refers to having an extra mental state requirement beyond that associated with the act such as intended result E.g. kidnapping, burglary, larceny, an intentional killing
What is the rule for a written statute requirement?
*hint two cases: Robinson v. California + Street v. State*
Case: Street v. State: Fine + imprisonment imposed, was fine just? Yes not cruel and unusual punishment because under common law it was allowed
Case: Robinson v. California (Rule) A state has broad authority to use its police power to regulate conduct within its borders for the health/safety/welfare of the public EXCEPT if the criminal law is used to punish someone’s status or condition alone (That constitutes Cruel and Unusual Punishment, that’s unconstitutional)
Explain the elements of murder in MPC.
(Knowingly, Purposely, Recklessly with extreme indifference to human life [aka depraved indifference]) Be sure to define what is meant by reckless.
What is the rule for extreme indifference?
"Acting purposely": conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or cause such result (they were aware death was possible)
"Acting knowingly": practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result. (you definitely wanted the death to happen)
"Extreme indifference to human life": reckless + utter disregard for human life, not intending but not caring if grievous harm results
Reckless- consciously disregard a substance and unjustifiable risk when such disregard = a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation.
RULE: A conviction for depraved indifference murder is supported by sufficient evidence if it is shown that the defendant’s conduct demonstrates an utter indifference to the life or safety of another.
What is the rule for misdemeanor manslaughter?
*hint State v. Biechele*
A person is guilty of misdemeanor manslaughter only if his underlying illegal conduct is a proximate cause of death.
Explain lawful v. unlawful killings
Lawful: there’s a recognized defense e.g., “self-dense”
Unlawful: no defense; without legal authority, justification or excuse
Legal authority: wartime killings
Justification: “self-defense”
Excuse: insanity
What is the rule addresses retroactivity ("ex post facto clause")?
*hint it comes from Rogers v. Tennessee*
A new judicial interpretation of a criminal law may be applied, unless it is unexpected and indefensible in reference to the law existing at the time of the Defendant’s act.
Explain the degrees of murder. What is the majority view of premeditation?
*hint State v. Guthrie*
Premeditation and deliberation (willful)
Premeditation- considered beforehand, planned in advance or involved prior calculation and design [how to do it] (majority-requires a time interval, minority-instantaneous)
Deliberation- a result of careful/conscious thought and with a weighing of considerations [whether to do it]
2. By use of certain defined methods, e.g., a deadly weapon
Second degree: “plain murder; it does NOT include the additional elements needed for first degree
Elements:
Unlawful killing of another human being with malice
Example:
Killing with intent to kill, Killing with intent to cause serious bodily injury, Killing with extreme recklessness
Mens rea= implied malice (aka depraved or abandon & malignant heart)
Majority View of Premeditation: To constitute first-degree murder, the defendant must have had some period of time between the development of the intent to kill and the actual killing to indicate that the act was premeditated and deliberate and not impulsive.
What is the rule for involuntary manslaughter?
*hint People v. Kolzow*
A homicide constitutes involuntary manslaughter when a defendant recklessly disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that her actions are likely to cause another’s death, and such death results.
2). Explain Sufficiency of Evidence?
3). What is meant by strict liability?
1. Conduct (actus reus)
2. Mental State (mens rea)
3.Results (signals that there is a causal relationship)
4. Causation ( there must be a link between the defendant's conduct and the results)
5. Attendant Circumstance ( a material which cannot be classified as any other element)
2). Standard of Review--> whether, based in the evidence presented at trial, a reasonable [rational] jury [factfinder] could find that all of the elements of the crime were proven beyond a reasonable doubt
3). For strict liability: minor, regulatory or in the public’s welfare (is consistent with due process for crime to be valid i.e. speeding)
1). What is the rule that addresses vagueness?
*hint City of Chicago v. Morales*
2). Explain the Rule of Lenity
*hint Bell v. United States*
3). What is the rule addresses statutory vs. common law interpretation?
*hint Lewis v. Superior Court*
1. A criminal law is vague under the Due Process Clause when it fails to provide a standard for the public and police to know what conduct is within its reach.
2 Part Analysis:
Fair Notice- the law must enable ordinary people to understand what conduct is prohibited
Prevent Arbitrary Enforcement- the law must provide minimal guidelines to guard against discriminatory and arbitrary enforcement *if the law fails to do either, statute is void and may not be applied to any person
2. Under the rule of lenity, statutory ambiguities regarding the definition of, or punishment for, a particular crime should be resolved in the defendant’s favor.
3. (1)- A court can look to the common law meaning of statutory terms to determine legislative intent. (2)- A court can avoid common law meaning of a statutory term to prevent broad reading of the legislation
Explain the deadly weapon rule.
*Transferred intent doctrine: developed by courts to address situations when defendant’s criminal act misses intended victim and harms unintended victim instead; under the doctrine: defendant’s intent (mens rea) “follows the bullet” or “transfers” from the intended victim to the unintended victim
Generally applied to intentional or purposeful conduct
Used to analyze “bad aim” situations, but not needed for mistaken ID situations
Deadly weapon rule (common law)- in absence of disqualifying facts, intent to kill may be inferred from defendant’s intentional use of a deadly weapon upon another person
(TRUE OR FALSE) Involuntary & voluntary is only under MPC.
FALSE! No voluntary or involuntary under MPC