Mens Rea
General vs. Specific Intent
General intent is when a crime penalizes conduct which causes general harm (battery, arson, negligent discharge of a firearm)
Specific intent is when a crime penalizes conduct and its specific result (battery with intent to cause physical injury, arson with the intent to commit insurance fraud)
Even though some criminal statutes may not explicitly state this, it is still a requirement in order to be charged with a crime.
What is a voluntary act?
The three ways of assistance which can create accomplice liability (CL)
2. Abetting (assistance by encouragement/psychological influence)
3. Assistance by omission (assuming omitter had duty to act)
What are the two mens rea elements for conspiracy?
Intent to agree to commit the underlying crime
Intent to commit the underlying crime
Defendant must have taken a _______ in order to be considered to have attempted a crime under the MPC
Substantial Step
Voluntary intoxication is a defense to which CL type of crime and which MPC mens rea element?
Specific intent crimes
Crimes requiring a mens rea of purposely/knowingly
Requirement for possession
CL: knowledge of the presence of the contraband and control over it
MPC on Possession: Knowledge of presence and control of contraband for a sufficient period to have been able to terminate his possession.
The three ways of assistance which can create accomplice liability (MPC)
2. Aid, agree, or attempt to aid principal in planning/commission of the crime (Same as CL)
3. Assist by omission (same as CL)
What are the two actus reus elements for conspiracy, and which one is not always required?
1. Agreement
2. Overt act (not always required)
What are the two mens rea requirements for an attempt crime? (CL)
(1) Must intentionally commit the acts that constitute the actus reus of an attempt and;
(2) Must perform these acts with the specific intention of committing the target crime
Definition of knowingly in MPC
- Conduct & attendant circumstances: defendant is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that the attendant circumstances exist
- Result: Defendant is practically certain his conduct will cause the result
CA statute makes it a criminal offense for a person to “use” or “be addicted to the use of narcotics.”
TX law made a crime of “being
found in a state of intoxication at a public
place.”
Which of these statutes is enforceable and why?
The two mens rea of accomplice liability
Intent to assist the primary party to engage in the conduct that forms the basis of the offense
The mental state required for commission of the offense, as provided in the definition of the offense
What are the two ways that individuals could be inferred (in the absence of direct evidence of agreement) to be involved in a conspiracy?
2. General circumstances such as continuous presence and communication with known conspirators and benefitting from them
Distinctions between how CL and MPC determine attempt
MPC determines attempt quicker, with certain actions constituting an attempt without needing to be close to completed conduct
CL determines attempt slower, the closer your conduct comes to the commission, the more likely an attempt will be considered to have occurred.
Ex. MPC considers certain kinds of prep as attempt, common law does not
Definition of Purposely in MPC
Conduct & Result - Conscious object to engage in conduct or cause result
Attendant Circumstances - Aware of the attendant circumstances' existence or believes/hopes they exist
Four situations where a duty to preserve the life of another exists (in other words, situations where an omission constitutes a crime)
Where a statute imposes a duty to care for another
Where one stands in a certain status relationship to another
Where one has assumed a contractual duty to care for another
Where one has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid
The two factors in determining a defendant's complicity which can balance out one another.
Knowingly providing substantial assistance
Knowing - Full awareness of the crimes being committed may allow a lesser amount of help to be considered complicity
Substantial Assistance - A great amount of assistance to the principal may allow complicity to be found despite a small amount of knowledge of the crimes being committed
Merger Rule for Conspiracy, CL vs. MPC
CL - Conspiracy and completed offense do not merge, they are separate crimes
MPC - If the completed offense is the sole criminal object of the conspiracy, then the crimes merge. But a conspiracy to commit multiple crimes does not merge with a simultaneous conviction for one of those crimes
Rules for abandonment defense on attempt
CL vs MPC
CL - No abandonment once attempt has been found
MPC - Abandonment may be invoked, when a defendant abandons his effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevented its commission, under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of criminal purpose.
Exceptions to no-strict-liability rule for the MPC
- For "violations" which are not classified as crimes under the MPC (traffic/parking tickets, ordinance violations, etc.)
- Special exception for statutory rape (no mens rea element for age of victim)
The exception to omission liability under the MPC
What is when a person is physically unable take action and fulfill their duty
Mere presence with the principal of the crime may not be considered complicity unless this circumstance is also present (Only under MPC)
Presence can be found to be sufficient for complicity if the presence of the individual encourages the perpetrator or facilitates the perpetrator's deed
See New Hampshire v. Merritt
What is the Pinkerton Rule?
Each member of a conspiracy is criminally liable for any crime committed by co-conspirators if the crimes committed were:
1. In furtherance of the conspiracy
2. Were reasonably foreseeable
What are the four motives which undermine an abandonment defense? (Remember abandonment is only available for attempt under MPC)
1. There is a better chance of being caught than defendant expected
2. Completion of the crime is harder than defendant expected
3. There will be a better time or place for the crime
4. There is a better victim for the crime