Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
McQuirter v. State
The jury must be satisfied beyond a
reasonable doubt that defendant intended
to have sexual intercourse. Social customs
and racial differences were allowed here.
A black man was convicted of an attempt
to commit an assault with intent to rape. A
white woman testified he was following
her but stopped once she went in a house.
United States v. Jackson
Attempt requires 1) act with same
culpability as the crime charged with
attempting, and 2) conduct that constitutes
a substantial step towards commission.
Defendants conspired to rob a bank and
one conspirator was captured and ratted
them out. Defendants were arrested on
their way to the bank.
People v. Jaffe -Factual impossibility is not a defense, still guilty of
If a person intends to commit an act that attempt
would not be a crime if complete, the -Legal impossibility is a defense, and not guilty
person cannot be convicted of an attempt
(impossibility doctrine). Defendant is -Called this case legal impossibility by the court, but
charged with attempting to receive stolen other courts have gone the other way, legally
goods but the goods were not stolen. impossible to complete the crime, not illegal to take
the goods
-Or fact is that the goods are not stolen
People v. Dlugash -This court calls it factual impossibility, this case
One is guilty of attempt when engaging in was a lot more dangerous than Jaffe
conduct to effect the commission of a -Under MPC, impossibility is not a defense, if
crime. Factual or legal impossibility is not circumstances as D believed them to be, you would
a defense if crime if the crime was have crime, with an exception of mitigation, when
committed as such person believed them there’s no danger the court can mitigate the crime
to be. Defendant shot the victim in the using impossibility
head. The victim was shot earlier in the -if you believe something will happen but don’t have
chest and might have been alive. the purpose you don’t have attempt
People v. Luparello Aiding and abetting, complicity, accomplice,
Intent to encourage or facilitate an offense solicitation are all the same thing, they help people
committed is not required for an commit crimes, guilty of the same crime (accomplice
aider/abettor. Defendant not only guilty of liability is a theory of liability)
crimes encouraged, but those that may -helping someone to do it, or causing someone to do
foreseeably result. Defendant got a it results in liability
married woman pregnant who left with -court here says it does not have to be the exact
her husband. Defendant and his friends crime you had purpose for, it could be reasonably
planned to beat the husband up but his foreseeable (this is majority)
friends killed the husband.
Wilcox v. Jeffery -encouragement is enough for actus reus
When someone encourages another in the -help does not actually have to make a difference
commission of an illegal act, they satisfy -principals don’t need to know you’re helping
the actus reus of accomplice liability. -guilty of what the principals are guilty of (analyze
Defendant was convicted of unlawfully principals first, so you know what accomplice are
aiding a jazz musician get employment in liable for)
the UK, because he went to the concert -if principals is not guilty, accomplice may be guilty,
and paid for a ticket. depending on why principals are not guilty
(diplomatic immunity, not found, dead)
-if you have a duty to act, omission suffice for actus
reus
Hicks v. United States -do not have to convict the principal to convict the
An accomplice must intentionally aid, accomplice
abet, or encourage the principal in order to -but if the principal is found not guilty, the
be found guilty. Defendant was present accomplice can be found guilty, we allow for
when shooter killed. Witnesses said he inconsistent juries (if the same jury then not
encouraged the shooting while defendant allowed), you still look at the elements for
claims he didn’t. accomplice
Outline to Hypo 2
1) disease or defect, symptoms, history,
medication versus unclear diagnosis, number
of odd people, easily faked, can be brought
upon himself since he can drink to reduce
medication effectiveness
2) M’Naghten, D is presumed sane at time of
the crime, did not know nature or quality of
acts or act is wrong, Buford goes to work,
does immigration work (whether one is
normally insane can be used as an
argument, did not know nature because “he
thinks he’s in a different
universe/hallucinating), for not know his act
was wrong – thought he was better than
society
3) Lacks substantial capacity, does not simply
have to be insane al the time
4) Diminished capacity, attempt = specific
intent, but nothing to drop to
5) Voluntary – drinking it, not involuntary
14. When do we use MPC vs. common law, strict liability or something since there’s two
opinions for everything
15. Where does the reasonable person play into criminal law, mental physical disabilities,
children, professionals, is it different from the reasonable person in tort law
16. What do you mean when you have us say “the law giveth, taketh away”
17. Causation?
18. Can lawyers and law students sit on the jury?
19. Every injury caused that does not lead to a instantaneous death = omission?
20. Omission requires physical capability? Use impossibility/insanity as defense? Fear
insufficient?
21. Try your best to do duty and fail?
22. Does every crime require social harm (actual dmg not needed)?
23. Technical defense, when waiving jury = issue of law instead of issue of fact?
24. Can mistake of fact apply to negligence (or reckless), since mistake of fact works even if
belief is unreasonable, while negligence…is based on a reasonably care, also negligence
requires no intent
25. What you need to know is what makes your conduct wrong, does that include morally
wrong conduct, or… also legally?
26. Marrero case, don’t all personal misreadings of material element statute negate the mens
rea (unless strict liability, or you misread jurisdictional element),
27. Ignorance of the law is not a defense, but since it negates material element exception,
then ignorance of all material elements is a defense
28. Regarding jurisdictional elements, under common law you’re held for the greater crime
even w/o mens rea, but under MPC you’re held for the lesser crime (since it rejects
MPC)?
29. Regarding strict liability there is no mistake defense…at all
30. Killing non-provoking victims, is there mistake of fact defense? no
31. Welansky case, owner prosecuted for club fire, does it matter he was not really in charge
of everything. What if his employee’s blocked the exits, replaced the material with
flammable things over series of years and he didn’t really know?
a. Is he being held criminally vicariously liable?
b. Can you be criminally liable for the criminal acts of third parties, a patient of a
doctor tells the doctor he will call someone, doctor does nothing and someone
dies
32. From today regarding involuntary manslaughter, you ask in step one if there’s a
substantial and unjustifiable risk, what is the same question? Step one you look at
negligence, then you look at if it’s gross
a. (magnitude of harm > social utility then it’s gross?)
33. Intent to kill (malice) vs. purpose (Carrol standard murder 1)
34. Mastery of the law?
35. Look at Alice hypo
36. Set a trap, and I know it, and it’s murder?, take something from the left of the podium
37. What is your glannon guide? – in the library
38. Let’s say you were drunk driving, and you get home safely. The police for some reason,
was talking to the bartender or some other source who said you drank and then drove.
Can they go to your door and arrest you?
39. Clarify on what atmosphere of malice constitutes for the provocation act doctrine – create
the atmoshphere
40. When looking at homicide do we also have to separately look at mens rea, or is like
analysis of the varying levels of homicide already include mens rea
41. Mens rea of knowingly, is that murder 2?
42. For a state that punishes the same for the attempt and the crime, can you get a death
penalty for attempt?
43. Practice midterms…and sample student answers?, like 20 or well 19 years would be nice
44. When you’re provoked and you kill the wrong person, most courts do not recognize
manslaughter when you’ve killed the wrong person under heat of passion right?
a. Why don’t they use transferred intent under common law?
45. Why is illegal arrest a legally adequate provocation?
46. Oh and to double check, adultery as a legally adequate provocation applies to women too
right in theory even though always male?
47. Distinction between a manslaughter with a long smoldering (when talking about a
cooling time), if you’re long smoldering isn’t that sort of like first degree murder? You’ve
clearly premeditated the murder during this “smoldering time where anger built up?
a. I mean since a good number of murderers have a “motive” and therefore make an
argument they “provoked” whoever to kill
48. Under the extreme emotional disturbance standard, can’t that apply to a good number of
1st degree murders, since when you premeditate someone, you’re automatically are
considered under an emotional disturbance (otherwise you wouldn’t kill someone), isn’t
technically everyone who’s murdering (1st degree at least) someone under an emotional
disturbance and had a reason
a. Like in the Carroll case, when he shot his wife, he clearly had a reason and he was
obviously under extreme emotional disturbance
49. Generally, regarding felony murder, do we still look at causation? Is it simply no mens
rea needed or complete strict liability? I know courts look at proximate cause when
looking at who’s acts and the agency theory,
50. If you attempt to kill someone, and they’re injured and paralyzed or something and kill
themselves later, you’re generally liable? Or is that something arguable?
51. Regarding the arson hypo, fire breaks out from a spark, do you have a legal duty to put
out the fire?
52. Why is it a year and a day rule, why not just a year?
a. If you want to infect someone with HIV, then you’re not liable for murder? HIV
takes many years to kill
53. 2 ppl shoot, each bullet would have killed in an hour, but with 2 bullets they both die in 5
minutes, regarding actual causation, do we look at but for their death? Or but for their
death in 5 minutes?
54. 2 people shoot at a guy with an arrow, but only one arrow hits, and they use the same
type of arrow, are they both responsible?
55. So when death is obvious (A shoots B) what do you say about proximate cause?
56. Complimentary human action, does that break the link or does it just depends?, arguable
57. Diff between mistake of fact and factual impossibility? Try to shoot the deer, but turned
out to be a man versus trying to shoot the man but it was a deer
58. Voodoo is factual impossibility?
a. How do we analyze impossibility if technically all legal impossibility can be
factual impossibility?
59. If someone is guilty under the dangerous impossibility doctrine for simply being
negligent, what do we have to analyze, just that a reasonable person should have known
the risk?
60. 3344Regarding shield cases, can that be argued as kidnapping and thus an inherently
dangerous felony?
61. Attempt, it only merges with the actual crime when the crime is complete right?
a. If you try to rob and someone dies, you are still guilty of attempted robberty,
b. But if you kill someone are you liable for assault/battery?
c. How about if you’re guilty for 1st degree murder, can you be guilty of an
attempted second degree murder?
62. Attempted conspiracy?
a. IS the person making an offer to commit a crime guilty of conspiracy? What if the
other person joking says “I agree” but the offeror didn’t realize it, is he still guilty
of conspiracy
b. Every conspiracy would also be an accomplice, you have helped by agreeing, it
automatically helps the offeror since he’s reassured he has people helping him
c. Can you be guilty of a conspiracy under accomplice liability, you helped someone
commit conspiracy by say giving them a contact information to someone
63. If two people commit the crime, they’re both guilty because they actually did commit the
crime, but they would also each be guilty under accomplice liability for committing the
crime? So there is basically two ways for them to commit the crime?
a. Is it possible for the principal to be guilty for a crime under accomplice theory?
Isn’t he helping others?
b. Can’t you have two principals, and thus each principal is helping the other out?
64. Under conspiracy, and one of the co-conspirators is guilty of an attempt, can you be
guilty of that too?
65. Estoppel theories as an exception to mistake of law, what constitutes an administrative
order?
a. How high enough does a government official have to be?
b. I know we can’t rely on the opinions of cops, but why not? But they’re the ones
that arrest you? You can violate plenty of laws but they ultimately decide whether
you’re in trouble or not and are at the beginning of the criminal justice system
66. Mistake of law can be used as a defense for strict liability crimes? –only for no notice
67. When talking about limitations of felony murder that must be in furtherance, it only
refers to acts of cofelons right? Use all approach
68. Lacking one element of self defense, what exactly is one element or two to mitigate to
manslaughter, can you mitigate from 1st to 2nd degree, or from VM to IM? What if ur
missing two elements of SD, generally only for honest but unreasonable
69. If you shoot someone, and accidentally kill someone else, transferred intent applies right?
Do you still get an attempt for the person you tried to kill?
70. If you ask us what crimes have we been committed, do we not mention defenses, and if
you ask us for what defenses can be asserted, that means only affirmative defenses of
justification/excuses, does it include like mistake of fact/law?
71. At common law, why wasn’t abandonment allowed as a defense for accomplice liability
72. What happens when there’s characteristics of both a wheel and chain conspiracy? Do
courts look at it as several conspiracies or is it a case by case basis on exactly how the
conspiracy works
73. the initial aggressor you’re still allowed to use nondeadly force right?, doesn’t mean give
you initiate a fight if you just wanted to hurt someone with nondeadly force and throw a
few punches
74. How does strict liability work for accomplice liability? And attempt? Courts split? MPC
rejects
75. For the merger doctrine, where the felony must have a purpose other than murder, there
can’t malice or it merges, does that include the gross recklessness definition of malice?
(exam)
76. How do research assistants for professors work?
77. For felony murder inherently dangerous limitation, you look at the statute in the abstract
versus the act in the abstract?
78. Do you have sample student answers or at least grading rubrics for the sample exams on
the library? 1999, fall 2001, spring 2001, spring 2003, and any more since you’ve been
teaching like 20 years
79. Glannon guide, named after Joseph Glannon?
80. Does drunk driving generally (in real life) end up as murder 2 or involuntary
manslaughter or is that something that totally depends and is arguable
81. Choice of evils for necessity – does the evil basically limited to death or serious bodily
harm or serious property harm
82. Can you also bring in experts for battered woman syndrome cases when the duress
defense is used (we talked about it for self defense), but there’s like an
imminence/reasonableness factor for duress
83. Is intoxication a type of diminished capacity?
84. Under the MPC, diminished capacity can be a full defense? If it drops from a general
defense down to like nothing?
85. Is diminished capacity kind of like imperfect insanity defense, if you’re missing elements
for insanity it drops down to diminished capacity
86. Does every duress case lead to a colorable issue of necessity? Is there always necessity
when there is a duress, because under duress you are forced to choose between someone
dying and… you commiting a crime (someone dying), every duress situation gives you a
choice of evils
87. When choosing lesser evils, you have to choose the least most evil right? Like if you had
to choose between like destroying 5 houses, 4 houses, and 3 houses, you have to choose
the 3 houses right? You can’t be like I chose the 4 houses over the 3 because my house
was in the 3?, better yet choose between 5 and 3 and 3, and your house is one of 3
88. Does the federal approach to entrapment strongly favor the prosecution since if the
defendant commited the crime, then you automatically have a strong argument that he
was predisposed to commiting the crime?
a. Can entrapment be used for strict liability crimes? Or does it matter which
approach is taken?
89. Provocation Act doctrine where defendant creates an atmosphere of malice, that also
applies if one of your co-felons starts the shooting right?
90. In determining whether it is specific or general intent crime, one of the things we look at
was the historical name, what does that mean?
a. Is there is a jurisdictional element in the statute, does that generally mean it is
more of a general intent crime?
91. Where there’s an insanity problem, do we have to prove that the defendant is competent
to stand trial
92. If you know with virtual certainty that people will die, the only levels of murder that
suffice would be gross reckless for murder 2 and involuntary manslaughter right?
93. If you’ve taken the last step for attempt, that satisfies all the other tests as well.
94. Irresistible impulse test – do we look at whether the defendant had no control at all? Or
just that he had no control even with police there, since a police could be at his elbow, but
he wanted to shoot the guy regardless of whether he was going to get caught
95. Law enforcement defense, can only be used by police?
96. Can you argue you thwarted the crime by going to the police?
97. Can I get participation points for moving the podium?