Key Differences CL v. MPC
What is CL and MPC broadly?
Common law is judge made rules in preceding case law that can be used when non statute exists or the statute is unclear.
Model Penal Code is when states adopt parts or all of the MPC to create clearer statutes.
Constructive and Actual Possession Definitions
Actual Possession: Physical Control over the property
Constructive Possession: Control or dominion over a property without actual possession/custody of it.
3 Situations Constructive Can Occur1) Master delivers his property to his servant to use or to keep or deliver for the master
2) The owner of property loses or mislays it
3) A property oner delivers the property to another as part of a transaction to be completed in the owner's presence
CL Types of Murder
Intent to kill murder
Intent to cause serious bodily harm
Depraved heart murder
Felony Murder
MPC Recklessly Definition
Circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life
Burglary = (1) breaking and (2) entering of (3) a building with (4) the intent to commit a felony
Intoxication CL v. MPC
Intoxication acts as a defense to crime if it negates a required element of the crime
At Common Law, voluntary intoxication is only a defense to the extent that it negates the mens rea of a specific intent crime (i.e., voluntary intoxication cannot serve to negate the mens rea for a general intent offense. You don’t get a pass for being drunk if you made yourself that way!) As such, it is a failure-of-proof defense
Under the M.P.C., a defendant may not introduce evidence of intoxication to negate a reckless (or negligent) mens rea
Both the Common Law and M.P.C. recognize involuntary intoxication as an affirmative defense
Types of Omission Crimes
1) State imposes a duty to act
2) Relationship imposes a duty to act
3) Contractual duty to care
4) Voluntary assumption of care
5) Creation of the peril
CL Involuntary Manslaughter Rule
In the commission of an unlawful act that is not a felony: (1) high degree or risk of death or serious bodily injury, in addition to the unreasonable risk required for ordinary negligence and (2) The defendant must be aware of the fact that his conduct creates that risk
(Gross negligence so extreme that is punishable as a crime)
MPC Murder Types
Purposive, Knowing, Reckless/extreme indifference to the value of human life
CL Embezzlement Definition
Embezzlement = (1) the fraudulent (2) conversion of (3) the property (4) of another (5) by one who is already in lawful possession of it
Solicitation CL v. MPC Key Differences
Failure to communicate is no bar to convocation under the MPC (even if letter has not actually been received) but is a bar in common law
Abandonment available under the MPC (BUT, must persuade or prevent; as with all abandonment, must be complete and voluntary)
CL Necessity Defense Rule
The defendant (1) reasonably believed that there was (2) an actual and specific threat that (3) required immediate action; (4) there was no realistic alternative to the criminal act, (5) the harm caused was not greater than the harm avoided, and (6) defendant did not contribute to/cause the threat
Extremely reckless conduct, which creates what a reasonable man would realize to be not only an unjustifiable but also a very high degree of risk of death or serious bodily injury to another or to others - though unaccompanied by any intent to kill or do serious bodily injury – and which actually causes the death of another, may constitute murder
Note***
Below knowledge but above recklessness so with some knowledge (if it is just recklessness it is just involuntary manslaughter)
Accomplice Liability MPC
A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of an offense if:
a) with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he
i) solicits such other person to commit it, or
ii) aids or agrees or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing, or
iii) having a legal duty (omission crimes) to prevent the commission of the offense, fails to make proper effort so to do; or
b) his conduct is expressly declared by law to establish his complicity
CL Larceny Definition
Larceny = (1) trespassory (2) taking and (3) carrying away of the (4) personal property (5) of another (6) with intent to steal it
Mere preparation is not an attempt
Common Law: look to what remains to complete the offense, based on the gravity of the offense and probability of success
MPC: look to what has been done already
What are the 3 types of Inchoate Crimes and Definitions
1) Attempt: an overt act that is done with the intent to commit a crime but falls short of completing the crime
2) Solicitation: the criminal offense of urging, advising, commanding, or otherwise inciting another to commit a crime
3) Conspiracy: An agreement by two or more person to commit an unlawful act, coupled with an intent to achieve the agreement’s objective, and action or conduct that furthers the agreement
CL Voluntary Manslaughter Definition
Voluntary
An intentional homicide committed by a defendant who, when he killed the defendant, was in the heat of passion from adequate provocation from the victim, which a reasonable man would lose his self-control from.
Abandonment MPC
When the actor’s conduct would otherwise constitute an attempt, it is an affirmative defense that he: (1) abandoned his effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevented its commission, AND (2) under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of his criminal purpose
CL Robbery Definition
Robbery = (1) trespassory (2) taking and (3) carrying away of the (4) personal property (5) of another (6) with intent to steal it (7) that the property be taken from the person or presence of the other and (8) that the taking be accomplished by means of force or putting in fear
Conspiracy CL v. MPC
Common Law
Must be bilateral (at least 2 people agree)
Overt act not traditionally required but now a statutory requirement
Conspiracy merges into completed offense
Pinkerton Rule: A co-conspirator can be convicted of substantive offenses committed by a co-conspirator so long as it was reasonably foreseeable that the substantive offense was within the scope of the unlawful project (in this case he was sitting in jail when the offenses)
MPC
Permits unilateral conspiracy (can form even where only one party agrees)
Overt act “in pursuance of” the conspiracy required (except for most serious offenses which I do not need to memorize)
No merger! Parities may be convicted of conspiracy and completed offenses
No Pinkerton liability: parties only liable for conspiracy and crimes they have personally committed
A defendant can be held vicariously liable for a substantive offense committed by another member of a conspiracy if: (1) the defendant was a party to the conspiracy, (2) the offense was within the scope of the unlawful project, (3) the offense was committed in furtherance of the conspiracy, and (4) the defendant could have reasonable foreseen the offense as a necessary or natural consequence of the unlawful agreement
The M'Naghten Test Rule Statement
To establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that (1) At the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under (2) Such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as (3)Not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing (4) Or if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong
MPC Insanity Defense Rule Statement
A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if: (1) at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect (2) he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law
CL False Pretenses Definition
False Pretenses = (1) a false representation of a material present or past fact (2) which causes the victim (3) to pass title to (4) his property to the wrongdoer, (5) who (a) knows his representation to be false and (b) intends thereby to defraud the victim