List of criminal concepts in common law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please improve this article if you can. (April 2008)
The tone or style of this article or section may not be appropriate for Wikipedia.
Specific concerns may be found on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.(April 2008)
This article or section needs to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please help improve this article with relevant internal links. (April 2008)
This article does not cite any references or sources. (April 2008)
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.

Contents

[edit] General concepts

  • All crimes require some voluntary act. One cannot be criminally liable for failing to do that which he is physically incapable of performing.
  • Duty to aid: no legal duty to aid except by statute or relationship, just as in tort.
  • Res Iudicata: not applicable in criminal cases and therefore usually an incorrect answer
  • General Defense Tactics: eliminating a element of a crime stronger than simply claiming a defense exists
  • Knowingly: standard met when one knows his conduct will bring about a particular result
  • Recklessly: standard of conscious disregard of a substantial or unjustifiable risk
  • Malice: crimes imposing the mens rea of malice do not require proof of intent that specific intent crimes do. Just a reckless disregard of obvious risk is enough. This standard is more than “criminal negligence.”
  • Voluntary intoxication NO defense to recklessness crimes. Voluntary OR involuntary intoxication is a valid defense to specific intent crimes. Voluntary intoxication will never reduce murder to manslaughter but may reduce 1st degree murder to 2d degree, if intoxication negates the defendants premeditation, deliberation or intent, OR intoxication could be a valid defense to the underlying felony in a felony-murder prosecution (esp. if the underlying is a specific intent crime).
  • Specific Intent Crimes: mistake of fact, whether reasonable or unreasonable, is a valid defense, as long as the mistake is honest.
  • Transferred Intent theory: If a defendant intended harmful result to one and in attempting to carry this out, caused a similar harm to another, this intent will be transferred from intended target to the actual harmed party. Does not apply to attempt crimes
  • Mens Rea: includes intentional conduct as well as reckless conduct
  • Doctrine of Merger: lesser offenses merge into greater (cannot be convicted both of robbery and assault, or robbery and larceny and battery, for instance) But in cases of 2 separate offences, like burglary and robbery, there is no merger since the crimes have distinct elements
  • “Alter Ego Rule”: Third party’s rights to defend another is only as extensive as the other’s actual rights. (So if you beat off what you perceive to be an attacker when in fact that person had a right to attack, then you are liable for battery).
  • “Reasonable Belief Rule” : opposite of Alter Ego Rule. A Third party is privileged to defend another as long as he reasonably believes the other is being unlawfully attacked.

[edit] Inchoate Crimes & Accomplices

Attempt Crimes: Specific intent + an overt act in furtherance of. Defendant must specifically intend to commit the target offense. (No attempted murder in “intent to commit serious injury”-type batteries, therefore, even if victim would have died in the beating, it would be murder)

Solicitation: solicitor must intend for the target offense to be committed

Legal Impossibility: sometimes a valid defense to attempt crimes, such as the Jaffe case; cannot attempt to receive stolen goods that aren’t really stolen.

Accomplice (P2)-- under common law, a person who gives aid, counsel, encouragement with intent to aid the principal in commission of a crime as to which the accomplice has the required mental state. He must be present at the commission of crime.

Principal (P1): does not necessarily have to be present at commission of crime

Accessory after the fact: is NOT an accomplice, but a separate crime in itself

Conspiracy: 1) express/implied agreement between 2 or more parties 2) a specific intent to enter into an agreement 3) a specific intent to achieve the objective of the conspiracy (meeting of the guilty minds). Impossibility NOT a defense to conspiracy. Withdrawal not a defense to conspiracy, but a defense to subsequent acts, if affirmative notification is given to all other conspirators.

Conspiracy: where a party knows of the conspiracy and gives aid, even though he did not give agreement to the original plan, he is now a co-conspirator.

Conspiracy: co-conspirators liable for all crimes perpetrated in furtherance of the conspiracy

“Overt Act” Conspiracy laws: just one party performing the overt act is enough. Withdrawal only effective if it occurs before the overt act has been committed

“Substantial Step” and Conspiracy: can render a co-conspirator liable for ATTEMPT and conspiracy; but the “substantial step” must be an act that goes beyond mere preparation

[edit] Killings

Retreat: only relevant in issues of deadly force in self defense

Involuntary Manslaughter: 1) by criminal negligence 2) in commission of felonies outside of felony murder or in commission of misdemeanors. Generally, when an intentional battery or assault results in an unintended death, even if the assailant never touched the victim

Murder: unlawful killing of another human with malice aforethought. Absence of facts to reduce to voluntary manslaughter or justifiable homicide. Malice aforethought is 1) intent to kill (intended use of deadly weapon qualifies) 2) intent to inflict great bodily injury 3) reckless indifference to unjustifiably high risk to life, 4) intending to commit a felony murder felony

Deadly Weapons Doctrine: just prima facie evidence of intent to kill, the defendant still has an opportunity to rebut this with evidence that he did not intend to kill

“Premeditation” in murder only for a very short time still qualifies

Suicide: not murder since one must kill “another human”

Redline: It is no longer felony murder when a justifiable homicide occurs in which a victim, bystander, or police kill a co-felon in the commission of a felony. Also, when one felon gets angry and shoots another co-felon, it is not felony murder, but simple intent murder

Agency Theory of Felony Murder: only deaths directly caused by a co-felon qualifies for prosecution. Note that accidental deaths qualify, as long as they are directly caused. (running over a pedestrian while fleeing from the scene)

M’Naughten Test: 1) at time of act, 2) he was laboring under such a defect of reason from a disease of mind 3) as to not know the nature and quality of what he was doing, or 4) if he did know, he did not know what he was doing was wrong.

Insane Delusions: If the situation as believed by the accused were true, ask what the legal liability would be. (Man falsely believes he is murdering Satan v. man falsely believing he’s murdering someone who looked at him funny)

Necessity: mostly in cases of “natural physical forces,” not human pressures (duress), giving rise to violating the law to produce a lesser harm than in obeying the law

Duress: not a valid defense for intentional killings

[edit] Other Crimes

Robbery: the presence requirement met even if the robber ties up the victim in one room and loots the house in other rooms. The “force, violence, or intimidation” element can be met with the use of knockout pills, drugs, etc. When the victim not intimidated by the robber, and gives him the money out of pity or other motivation rather than intimidation or fear, it is just attempted robbery.

Extortion: statutes usually deal with demands for money, not chattels

Battery: a general intent crime w/ recklessness. But one is privileged to use a certain amount of force in defense of property

Assault: 2 types: 1) attempted battery (intent to cause physical injury) or 1) intentional creation of 2) reasonable apprehension in mind of victim of 3) immediate bodily harm. The 2d “intent to frighten” assault is only recognized in a minority of states

Federal Stautory Crimes: do not require mental retainment of jurisdictional requirements

False Pretenses: deals with title to property

Arson: a malice crime, no specific intent needed. Charring of combustible materials enough

Burglary: “breaking” here is just some force used to gain entry, even opening an unlocked door, or constructive breaking. Hiding in a building during the day to emerge at night to steal is NOT burglary, even if the person “breaks” out of the dwelling. Can be committed in a hotel or any other place of human habitation. Constructive breaking in burglary can be found in 1) fraud, 2) threat of force (barging in), 3) chimney

Larceny: one can be guilty of larceny of stolen property. Also, can occur when a person takes his own property someone else has a legal pledge/lien interest in (taking your car out of a parking garage without paying)

Larceny of lost/mislaid property: the finder 1) must intend to steal the item at the moment of finding, where 2) the finder knows of the items owner or has reason to believe he can ascertain the owner’s identity. Therefore, if the finder intends to return then later decides to keep the item, it is NOT larceny

Larceny: covered: tangible personal property, lost/mislaid items, gas/electricity, contraband. Not covered: nonpayment of services, real property, abandoned property, wild animals, intangible personal property.

Embezzlement v. larceny: 1)fraudulent 2) conversion of 3) property 4) of another 5) by one already in possession of it. Therefore, if employee is in lawful possession of the item, it is embezzlement. Another way to think about it is theft between bailor and bailee. Embezzlement requires serious interference with property rights (not merely asportation). Lawful possession usually is the domain of high level employees (who commit embezzlement) v. lower level employees who simply have “custody” of the item, and therefore commit larceny