Specific intent: inchoate crimes, 1st degree murder, crimes against property, burglary

Malice: 2nd degree murder, arson

General intent: everything else (except strict liability crimes)

Insanity, involuntary intoxication, duress ALWAYS OK

General intent: ALSO Rz mistake of fact

Malice: ALSO Rz mistake of fact 

Specific intent: ALSO UnRz, honest mistake of fact, voluntary intoxication, [diminished capacity]

ACCOMPLICE (in modern codes):

* Action with intent to assist in crime, OR

* Assisted or encouraged principals in some significant way, w/ knowledge it would be used to commit the crime (lawful act? did D have "stake in the outcome"?)

Liable for: originally intended crime, AND all other foreseeable crimes committed ("D will argue that proximate cause was interrupted by the intentional killing by A...")

Withdrawal:

- repudiate any encouragement or neutralize any assistance

- before crime is committed

CONSPIRACY

* Agreement

* (Majority Jx only) Slight overt act in furtherance of conspiracy

* Specific Intent to pursue unlawful objective

* Actual meeting of the minds (remember Wharton Rule)

Liable for: all crimes committed in furtherance of objectives of the conspiracy and were natural and probable consequences of the conspiracy (including by all other conspirators in far-off places!)

Withdrawal from liability for future crimes (already nailed on conspiracy):

- inform ALL co-conspirators

- while still time for others to abandon their plans

ATTEMPT

* specific intent to complete target offense

* Substantial step toward completing the offense (not just mere preparation)

M'Naghten Test

* Unable to know the wrongfulness of his actions or couldn't understand the nature and quality of his acts (cognitive)

Irresistible Impulse

* D had no self-control or free choice (volitional - "policemen at the elbow test")

Durham Rule (liberal)

* Behavior a "product" of mental illness

Model Penal Code (ALI):

* Lacked "substantial" capacity to either appreciate the wrongfulness of conduct or to conform it to the requirements of law

"fail to be aware that a substantial and unjustifiable risk exists or that a result will follow"

re: involuntary manslaughter

Common law crimes against property?

Larceny

Larceny by trick

Robbery

Extortion

False pretenses

Embezzlement

Receipt of stolen property

Forgery

Larceny:

* Wrongful taking (w/o consent)

* Asportation/carrying away

* Personal property of another (not title)

* With intent to permanently deprive

Larceny by Trick:

Larceny elements PLUS

* Misrepresentation used to obtain "consent"

[distinguish from false pretense, which is to obtain "title"]

Robbery:

Larceny elements PLUS

* Taken from the person or his presence

* By means of physical harm against human being, or threats of IMMINENT physical harm to put a human being in fear for their safety (not pickpocketing when victim unaware of it)

Extortion:

Similar to robbery, but DON'T NEED:

 taken from person or victim

 threat of imminent, physical harm against human being

False pretenses: (distinguish from larceny by trick [tort], misrepresentation [tort], and contract breach [contract])

* Obtaining TITLE

* property of another

* intentional (knowing) false statement of past or existing fact (NOT false promises... that's contract violation yes?)

* Intent to defraud

Embezzlement (possession)

* fraudulent

* conversion (don't need to carry away)

* of property of another

* by a person in lawful possession of that property (e.g. bigwig)

[don't need personal benefit]

Receipt of stolen property

* Knowledge it was stolen when receiving it

* Intent to permanently deprive

Forgery

* Making or altering

* A false instrument (must be about very nature of instrument, not simply its contents)

* Intent to defraud

Arson

* Malicious

* Burning

* of dwelling house (on MBE, might be anything)

* of another

Burglary

* Breaking (any force [including to open an unlocked closed door] including by constructive breaking by fraud)

* Entering

* a dwelling house

* of another

* at night

* with intent to commit felony or theft

Permissible:

* Improperly Mirandized statements (but not forced)

* Pre or post unMirandized silence (should've asserted right to attorney)

* unXnally seized evidence

Impermissible:

* Post Miranda silence

* Massiah violations (post-indictment interrogation w/o counsel present)

* Coerced confessions

• Probable cause facts from a witness
• Enough info for a magistrate to make a "commonsense evaluation" based upon the "totality of the circumstances"
• Neutral and detached magistrate
• Warrant properly executed (not used after stale)
• Stated w/ sufficient particularity of the place to be searched and the type of items sought

14A - incorporation of most of Bill of Rights

4A - right against "unRz searches and seizures," or warrant must be issued based on probable cause... Rz expectation of privacy violated...

5A - right against self-incrimination (custodial interrogation before Miranda stuff is triggered... interrogation = any conduct should've known would obtain an incriminating statement)

5A - right to counsel at all custodial interrogations

14A - due process re: involuntary confessions

6A - right to counsel at all "critical stages" of a prosecution after formal proceedings have begun (post-indictment interrogation, post-charge lineup)

6A - right to confront witnesses

Incident to a lawful arrest (warrant exception): can search "wingspan," includes interior of car and containers (not the trunk)

Automobile Exception (warrant exception): if probable cause to search automobile, can search! (trunk included), and containers that Rzably might contain the items police have probable cause to search

If police custody, if D asserts Miranda rights:

* Police may not again try to get a waiver re: "same" crime

* Police can still try to get waivers for "other" crimes, after significant time lapse and fresh set of warnings

   BUT if exercised right to counsel, police must stop, period

[once D gives waiver, can be questioned on any crime]

If after charges filed and entered "critical stage" of proceedings:

* Right to not be questioned unless attorney is present, about CHARGED offenses (6A is offense-specific, unlike 5A)

6A right to counsel (critical stage)

Due Process

Felony

Misdemeanor, only if actual jail or suspended sentence

When does one have the right to a jury?

Does a jury need to be unanimous?

Only if non-petty offense (potential sentence over 6 months)

Jury of twelve can vote 9-3 to convict,

If only six then must be unanimous

Derivative-use immunity

If witness was granted ("transactional") immunity, then the granting sovereign cannot prosecute about any crimes he is required to testify about

However, another sovereign can prosecute, but in doing so may not use the immunized testimony or any evidence that may have been derived from it (heavy burden on govt)... [inadmissible, treat like a poisonous tree]

Even if charged with 1st degree murder...

1. establish there was a murder, go through the malice quartet

2. THEN whether it was 1st or 2nd degree murder (assuming no statute is stated, then whether it was premeditated and deliberated (can happen in an instant)]

3. Mitigation