Term
|
Definition
General intent requires that the
1) defendant be aware that he is acting in a proscribed way and
2) that any attendant circumstances required by the crime are present. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Under the Model Penal Code, a defendant is entitled to acquittal if he lacks substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality or the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.
Thus, it essentially combines the cognitive test of M’Naghten and the volitional test of the irresistible impulse test (i.e., because of mental illness, the defendant was unable to control his actions or to conform his conduct to the law). |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The M’Naghten test is a cognitive test that looks at the defendant’s ability to distinguish right from wrong. It requires a disease to cause a defect in the defendant’s reasoning such that he cannot know the wrongfulness of his actions or understand the nature and quality of his actions. |
|
|
Term
"mistake of fact" defense |
|
Definition
For mistake of fact, the mistake must negate the defendant’s required state of mind. If a defendant does not have the required state of mind—or mens rea—he cannot be convicted of the crime.
The defense is available forgeneral intent crimes; however, the mistake must be reasonable.
The defense is available for specific intent crimes, and, unlike general intent crimes, the mistake need not be reasonable.
The mistake need not be reasonable when used as a defense for specific intent crimes. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
requires that at the time of the taking, the defendant must have the intent to permanently deprive the person of the property. If the finder takes possession of the lost property without the intent to steal but later formulates this intent, he has NOT committed larceny.
A finder of lost property may be guilty of larceny if he (i) knowsthe owner’s identity or has reason to believe he can find it out; and (ii) at the moment he takes possession of the lost property, has the intent necessary for larceny.
A person to whom property is delivered by mistake may, by accepting the property, be guilty of larceny if the recipient (i) at the time of the misdelivery, realizes the mistake that is being made; and (ii) at the time he accepts the delivery, has the intent required for larceny. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
False pretenses generally consists of obtaining title to another's property by an intentional false statement of past or existing fact, with intent to defraud the other. The passing of title is an element of false pretenses. Whether the defendant obtains title depends on what the victim intended to convey to the defendant. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Forgery consists of the making or altering of a false writing with the intent to defraud. A writing that has apparent legal significance may be the subject of common law forgery.
The writing need not have monetary value; any legal significance suffices.
Writings that derive their value from the mere fact of their existence—historical or artistic value—cannot be the subject of common law forgery. |
|
|
Term
4 ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF CRIMES |
|
Definition
Act
Mental State
Causation
Concurrence |
|
|
Term
8 Defenses
[descending order of coverage] |
|
Definition
1. Insanity
2. Voluntary intoxication
3. Infancy
4. Mistake
5. Self defense
6. Necessity
7. Duress
8. Entrapment |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A crime may be prosecuted in any state where:
a) an ACT that was part of the crime took place; or
b) the RESULT took place. |
|
|
Term
BURDEN OF PROOF
elements of a crime?
NY Defenses? |
|
Definition
Elements of the crime: In a criminal case, the prosecution must prove each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt ("BARD")
Defenses in NEW YORK:
New York divides its defenses into two types:
(a) “Defenses”: Prosecution must disprove beyond a reasonable doubt.
(b) “Affirmative Defenses”: The defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence. |
|
|
Term
CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES
felony
vs.
misdemeanor |
|
Definition
a) Felony: A crime that may be punished by death or more than 1 year imprisonment.
b) Misdemeanor: A crime punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment for no more than 1 year. |
|
|
Term
Involuntary movements that are not considered criminal “acts” |
|
Definition
(1) one that is not the product of the actor's volition (e.g., being pushed)
(2) SLEEP WALKING (note: not the same as falling asleep (e.g., while driving)) or otherwise unconscious conduct.
(3) a reflex or CONVULSION (e.g., acts during epileptic seizure) |
|
|
Term
“OMISSIONS”: A failure to act can also be the basis for criminal liability, provided three requirements are satisfied. |
|
Definition
a) you need a legal duty which can be created in five different ways:
1) STATUTE (filing tax returns, professionals reporting child abuse)
2) CONTRACT (babysitter, doctor, lifeguard)
3) ***STATUS RELATIONSHIP (parent/child; spouse/spouse)
4) VOLUNTARY assumption of care.
5) CREATION of the PERIL
b) KNOWLEDGE of the duty
c) the ABILITY TO HELP (if you can't swim you're not liable no matter what) |
|
|
Term
4 COMMON LAW MENTAL STATES |
|
Definition
1) SPECIFIC INTENT (highest level)
- *Defenses: There are two defenses that available only for specific intent crimes: voluntary intoxication and unreasonable MISTAKE of FACT
2) MALICE: When a defendant acts intentionally or with "reckless disregard" of an obvious or known risk. (eg, murder, arson)
3) GENERAL INTENT: D need only be GENERALLY AWARE of the factors constituting the crime; he need not intend a specific result.
- Note: The jury can usually infer the general intent simply from the doing of the act.
4) Strict Liability Crimes (no mental state is needed)
Two Types of Strict Liability Crimes:
1. PUBLIC WELFARE
2. STATUTORY RAPE |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
NEW YORK MENTAL STATES: The Model Penal Code (MPC) no longer uses the common law mental states; instead, it uses the five mental states, defined as follows by the Model Penal Code:
§Intentionally – when D’s conscious desire is to accomplish particular result
§ Knowingly – when D is aware of what he is doing
§ Recklessly – when D is aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk, and consciously disregards that risk
§ Negligently – when D should know about a substantially and unjustifiable risk
§ Strict liability – no mental state required
|
|
|
Term
PROXIMATE (OR “LEGAL”) CAUSATION |
|
Definition
a) The Rule: A defendant is a proximate cause if the bad result is a natural and probable consequence of the defendant's conduct.
b) Applications:
1) not proximate cause if UNFORESEEABLE, INTERVENING event
2) eggshell skull: D will be considered a proximate cause even if the victim's PREEXISTING WEAKNESS contributed to the bad result.
|
|
|
Term
The "Concurrence" Principle |
|
Definition
1. The Rule: The defendant must have the required MENTAL STATE at the same time as he engages in the CULPABLE ACTS.
2. Application: Concurrence issues arise most frequently with two crimes: a) Larceny b) Burglary
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
common law:
M: GENERAL INTENT
A:- the unlawful application of force to another, resulting in either bodily injury or offensive touching.
NY: battery is not a separate crime (see NY assault) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
COMMON LAW:
M: – specific intent
- Attempted battery (Swing and a miss)
OR
- The intentional creation
· Other than by mere words
· Of a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the victim
Of imminent bodily harm
NY ASSAULT:
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
o Agg assault and battery
§ Weapon is used
§ Victim is child, handicapped, or otherwise vulnerable OR
Intent is to commit a robbery or rape |
|
|