Angela's Crim Law (Goodman)

Angela's Crim Law (Goodman) - • Elements: o AR...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: • Elements: o AR Voluntary—decided by personal choice • MPC 2.01(1) and (2): NOT reflex, convulsion, sleeping, hypnosis • CASE: Martin—cops took to hwy to charge w/ pub intox (not) • CASE: Utter—when invol—(cond response is defense) BUT when state is voluntarily induced (is!) Volitional—ability to make choice/determine something Cond response? Time frame? At exact moment crime was committed, was there vol act by D? (broad/narrow time frame) Omission: 5 duties. • Domestic relationship (spousal, parent/child) o CASE: Beardsley—lover no duty) • Public duty by position/status relationship (Dr./patient, teacher/child, police) (CASE: Kitty) o Did duty expire? CASE: Barber—Dr. took off life supp b/c not effect. Proportionality: if burden > benefit, no duty • 1 assumes contractual duty • 1 voluntarily cares for another (and prevents other from giving aid) • Create the danger o MR What MR is required? Whatever it is, it applies to all material elements of crime How defined? MPC 2.02(2) Intents: (purpose, knowl, reckless, negligence)—if not stated, at least reckless • Negligence (based on reas. person—should be aware) • Recklessness * (consciously disregards substantial and unjustifiable risk AND must be gross deviation from std of conduct of law abiding person in that person’s shoes) • Knowledge (aware of conduct or attendant circumstances AND awareness that result is practically certain—if result crime) o Consider willful blindness doctrine! (MPC 2.02(7)—if you don’t know , but you know there’s a high probability=know—unless you think it’s not (ostrich rule), CASE: Nations (16 yo at dance club—MO law doesn’t incorp willful blind) • Purpose (it’s his conscious objective to act/cause result. If there are attendant circumstances, he’s aware/thinks they exist) Common law (malice, intentional, knowl, reck, neglig) • Specific/general intent crimes o spec=spec purpose of doing act—purp/knowl o general=just have to intend to do the thing you did—no mental state required—recklessness, neg??) (CASE: Conley—hit boy) Consider statutory interpret (CASE: Morris—intent w/ worm virus 2x?) Is there defense that would negate the element?? • Mistake of fact will negate MR when (MPC 2.04(1)) o Spec intent req, if it negates spec intent (knowl required, you didn’t know (if purpose or knowledge) (CASE: Nevarro—steal beams). Belief=good faith, doesn’t matter if unreasonable o If general intent, mistake must be 1) honest 2) reasonable in order to negate • Mistake of law—never work!! • Lambert defense: notice req where penalty may be suffered for failure to act when person is completely unaware of any wrongdoing (registering conviction when move somewhere new) o Causation 3 ?’s: • did D cause conduct/result?...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/15/2008 for the course CRIMINAL I taught by Professor Goodman during the Spring '08 term at Pepperdine.

Page1 / 9

Angela's Crim Law (Goodman) - • Elements: o AR...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online