Actus Reus, Mens Rea and Causation
True or False.
An act consisting of a reflex gives rise to criminal liability.
False.
An act consisting of a reflex does NOT give rise to criminal liability.
True or False. Mistake of Fact is a valid excuse.
True.
What are the two types of homicides?
Murder and manslaughter
What are inchoate offenses and what are they?
Offenses that come short of the targeted offense
Solicitation, attempt and conspiracy
True or false. A Defendant may not use deadly force when claiming self defense.
False. Defendant may defend himself with deadly force only if the attack threatens D with serious bodily harm.
What is Mens Rea?
Culpable state at the time the person committed the crime.
True or False. A mistake of fact, whether reasonable or unreasonable, is not a defense to a strict-liability offense.
True.
What is the general rule for felony-murder?
Under the felony-murder rule, if D, while in the process of committing certain felonies, kills another (even accidentally), the killing is murder.
What are the defenses to Attempt?
1) Legal Impossibility
2) Abandonment
Factual Impossibility= Not a defense
What are the two types of causation and define/explain each one.
1. Actual Cause - But for the defendant's conduct, the result would have occurred or the act was the substantial factor in bringing about the result
2. Proximate Cause - act and harm are sufficiently closely related that the act is the proximate or legal cause of the harm.
When is mistake of law an excuse?
1. Defendant claims a mistake as to the definition or coverage of the law (i.e. ∆ didn’t know that the law applied to him)
2. Defendant claims they had no knowledge of a law whose statute specifically require them to have knowledge.
3. Defendant claims no fair notice of law’s existence – either it has never been made public or they were never specifically put on notice of their obligation.
Which felonies do the Felony-Murder Rule apply to?
Burglary, arson, rape, robbery and kidnapping (BARK)
Sexual Battery is included in Florida
What is the required Mens Rea for Conspiracy?
Two Intents you NEED:
1) Intent to enter into agreement
2) Intent to achieve the objective of agreement (crime)
1. The defendant must use no more force than what the defendant would be entitled to use as a matter of his or her own self-protection, based on the defendant's view of the circumstances.
2. Those circumstances, as the defendant sees them, must be such that the third party would be justified in defending himself or herself with the same amount of force used by the defendant.
3. The defendant must believe that the intervention is necessary.
Under which circumstances will there be criminal liability for omission to act?
1. Special Relationship
2. Contract
3. Defendant caused danger
4. Undertakes to give assistance and leaves victim worse off than he was before
A statute provides “any person who knowingly sells intoxicating liquor to a person under 21 years of age is guilty of a misdemeanor and may be fined $1,000 or sentenced to up to six months in jail, or both.” A patron ordered a drink at a bar. The bartender asked for some identification, and the patron produced a driver’s license stating that he was 25 years old. In fact, the patron was only 18 years old, but he had some gray hair and was balding. A plainclothes police officer sitting at the bar witnessed the bartender selling a drink to the patron. The officer knew that the patron was under 21 years old, and demanded to see the patron’s driver’s license. The officer determined it to be false and arrested the bartender for violation of the statute.Will the bartender likely be found guilty?
A. Yes, because this type of statute is a strict liability statute and the bartender’s knowledge of the patron’s age is irrelevant.
B. Yes, because the bartender knew that the patron was under 21 years old.
C. No, because the bartender made a reasonable mistake concerning the age of the patron.
D. No, because the patron produced a driver’s license that stated that he was 25 years old.
C. No, because the bartender made a reasonable mistake concerning the age of the patron
What are three ways you can show malice aforethought?
1. Intent to kill
2. intent to do grievous bodily injury
3. Depraved heart killing/Extreme recklessness
4. Felony Murder
5. Intent to oppose the law -
What is the rule of merger and to which inchoate crimes does it apply?
The rule of merger applies to the extent where a defendant cannot be convicted of both a completed offense and an attempt to commit it.
Applies to solicitation and attempt.
A woman was walking down the street when she saw her friend lying on the sidewalk about 20 yards ahead. The friend was struggling to get up and yelling “stop!” to a man who was holding her down. Whenever the friend moved, the man would forcefully shove her back down. Believing that her friend was being attacked, the woman ran over and pushed the man off her friend. The man turned out to be an undercover police officer who had seen the friend steal a woman’s purse and was attempting to detain the friend until on-duty police officers arrived to arrest her. The jurisdiction follows the modern common law approach to defense of others.
If the woman is charged with assault, is she likely to be found guilty?
A woman was walking down the street when she saw her friend lying on the sidewalk about 20 yards ahead. The friend was struggling to get up and yelling “stop!” to a man who was holding her down. Whenever the friend moved, the man would forcefully shove her back down. Believing that her friend was being attacked, the woman ran over and pushed the man off her friend. The man turned out to be an undercover police officer who had seen the friend steal a woman’s purse and was attempting to detain the friend until on-duty police officers arrived to arrest her. The jurisdiction follows the modern common law approach to defense of others.
If the woman is charged with assault, is she likely to be found guilty?
A. No, because she reasonably perceived that it was necessary for her to defend her friend.
B. No, because she did not use deadly force.
C. Yes, because the friend had just committed a crime.
D. Yes, because the friend would not have been able to claim self-defense.
A. No, because she reasonably perceived that it was necessary for her to defend her friend.
After a drug deal went wrong, George shot Rudolfo twice in the abdomen, gravely wounding him. Rudolfo was rushed to the hospital. While he was still unconscious, Rudolfo was placed on a gurney and wheeled into an X-ray room. A hospital employee then sat him up at an angle but failed to secure him to the gurney before lowering a side rail. As a result, Rudolfo fell off of the gurney, breaking his neck at the fifth and sixth vertebrae. This break resulted in Rudolfo dying almost instantaneously as a result of spinal shock.
George has been charged with first degree murder in the shooting of Rudolfo. His defense counsel has argued, however, that George did not cause Rudolfo’s death due to the intervening negligence of the hospital employee who failed to secure him to the gurney while he was being x-rayed, resulting in his fall and subsequent death. Which of the following is most accurate:
A. The fact-finder will probably find that George did not cause Rudolfo’s death because the hospital employee’s negligence broke the causal chain.
B. The fact-finder will probably find that George did not cause Rudolfo’s death because the hospital employee was the only proximate cause of Rudolfo’s death.
C. The fact-finder will probably find that George caused Rudolfo’s death.
D. Answers (a) and (b) are correct, and answer (c) is incorrect.
C. The fact-finder will probably find that George caused Rudolfo’s death.
The laws of the state provide that “any person who engages in sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 16 shall have committed the crime of statutory rape.”
A waitress propositioned the defendant to have a sexual encounter at a nearby hotel. When they got up to the room, she told the defendant that she would be 16 the next week. In fact, the waitress, who had been adopted, was mistaken about her actual birth date; she had actually turned 16 the week before. The waitress and the defendant engage in sexual intercourse, and the defendant is subsequently charged with statutory rape.Will the defendant likely be found guilty?
A. Yes, because he intended to engage in sexual intercourse with a minor.
B.Yes, because a mistake of fact is not a defense to a strict liability crime.
C. No, because the waitress was older than 16.
D. No, because the waitress initiated the sexual encounter.
C. No, because the waitress was older than 16.
Two teens asked a third teen to help them steal a car. Each of the first two teens were armed; the third teen was not. The trio silently approached a stranger from behind as the stranger was walking to his car. Without warning, one of the armed teens shot the stranger in the back of his head, killing him. In the majority of common-law jurisdictions, could the unarmed teen be liable for the stranger’s death?
A. Yes, because the shooting was in furtherance of the car theft.
B. Yes, because the shooting was foreseeable.
C. No, because the unarmed teen did not create a dangerous atmosphere.
D. No, because the unarmed teen did not agree that the trio could use deadly force to steal the car.
A. Yes, because the shooting was in furtherance of the car theft.
A woman agreed with two other people to rob a series of convenience stores. Together, the trio successfully robbed a total of seven stores. The woman then informed her two partners that she would not be participating in any more robberies. Two weeks later, the other two participants were arrested in the course of attempting to rob an eighth store. These two informed the police that the woman was part of the conspiracy.What are all the charges, if any, that the woman could be guilty of in a state that applies the common law?
A. Seven counts of robbery.
B. Seven counts of robbery and one count of conspiracy to commit robbery.
C. Seven counts of robbery and seven counts of conspiracy to commit robbery.
D. Seven counts of robbery, one count of attempted robbery, and eight counts of conspiracy to commit robbery.
B. Seven counts of robbery and one count of conspiracy to commit robbery.
Lenny was walking on the sidewalk in an urban, residential block when he saw a girl’s red bicycle lying on the ground in front of someone’s home. Although he didn’t own the bicycle or know to whom it belonged, Lenny nonetheless grabbed it and quickly started to ride it away.
Cherie lived in the house from which the bicycle was being taken. It was her eleven year-old daughter’s bike. When Cherie saw Lenny taking it and starting to pedal away, she immediately started running after him, screaming at him at the top of her lungs for him to stop. Lenny couldn’t ride very fast as he is a grown man and the bicycle was child-sized. As a result, Cherie easily caught up with him and grabbed him by the shoulders and dragged him off the bike. As a result of being dragged in that fashion by Cherie, Lenny’s foot got caught in the rear wheel and he broke his ankle as he fell awkwardly to the street.Lenny has filed a private criminal complaint against Cherie for assault. If Cherie is actually prosecuted for that criminal offense, does she have a good defense? Which of the following is most accurate:
A. Cherie has a good defense of property defense in these circumstances.Correct. Cherie does have a good defense-of-property defense to an assault charge in these circumstances.
B. Cherie does not have a good defense of property defense in these circumstances because that defense does not permit the actor to physically assault someone.
C. Cherie does not have a good defense of property defense in these circumstances because the bicycle in question was her daughter’s, not Cherie’s.
D. Answers (b) and (c) are correct, but answer (a) is incorrect.
A. Cherie has a good defense of property defense in these circumstances.Correct. Cherie does have a good defense-of-property defense to an assault charge in these circumstances.