Legal Basis for:

I. Principles in Punishment
3 types of law: CL, ST and Const Crime: conduct committed w/ a criminally culpable state of mind 1. Act 2. Ste of mind 3. Causation (Social harm) When analyzing jump rt into murder (not act/ste of mind, cause)

A. Theories
Punishment requires justification bc it involves pain or deprivation that people wish to avoid Dominant approaches to justification 1. Retributivist: punishment is justifies when people deserve a. Moral desert of offender is suff for to pun and nec condition of pun/ crim prev must be added to MD to justify pun/ b. Moral culpability of offender gives society a duty to pun offender so we have obl to create institutions so retrib can be achieved 2. Utilitarian: justification lays in purpose that punishment serves/only should hurt crim Beneficial conseq of: a. Gen deterrence b. Ind deterrence c. Incap, rehabilitation and other forms of risk management d. Reform B: Model Penal Code in Action

II. Principles of legality:

1. Legality: no crime w/o existing law, no pun w/o existing law (1st/most imp prin) 2. Void for vagueness: based on due process, ST a. Fair warning/notice b. Protect agst arb and discr enfor (selective enforcement) 3. Rule of strict construction: (lenity) if uncertain, view in favor of accused and construed agst Gov

III. Actus Reus (AR)

Actus Reus: physical/ external part of the crime (objective) Act or harm and its conn link, causation, bw a. Actus as the vol phys mvmt; and b. Reus as conduct that results in certain harm (cause an inj to leg interest protected in crime)

A. Voluntary Act
Act that caused the SH 1

1. Under CL Act: volitional bodily mvmt (no crim liability for invol act or omiss of act unless
theres a duty) Usually essential for crim resp even for SL (no men ste req) 2. Under MPC: Act/action is a bodily mvmt whether vol or invol (doesnt define vol act but defines not vol: reflex, convulsion, or mvmt during uncon or sleep, hypnosis and not product of effort or determ of actor (conscious or habitual) Omiss and Leg Duty created by 1. ST 2. Imposed by civil law Result crimes: Law pun bc of unwanted outcome (death or destruction of a dwelling) Pun for harm resulting from act not for thoughts or vol acts/omiss Conduct crimes: Law proh specific dang behav (DUI or solic to commit murder) In tang sense, may be no harm (no one was inj from DUI) bc leg proh act to avoid resulting harm if conduct isnt deterred or terminated SH occurs when ending of socially valuable interest occurs C aims his gun at the target and shoots while D unforeseeable walks in front of target and is killed as a result. C lacks blameworthy ste of mind (mens rea) BUT his act was voluntary Act CL Volitional bodily mvmt

MPC Bodily mvmt (invol or vol) No def for vol act only not vol

B. Omission
**No leg duty created by moral obligation Duty is created by: First four started as common law a. Trad status (parent/child or hus/wife) b. Contractual duty to care c. Assumption of resp d. Failure to act after creates risk of harm e. ST imposes duty- (Under MPC)

C. Social Harm
1. Loss suff from crime is experienced on ind level and by society /intangible harm from every crime like comm loss of sense of sec 2. Negation, endang, or destruct of an ind, group or ste int which is socially valuable

IV. Mens Rea (MR)

Mens rea is s ste of mind regarding SH of offense

Ste of mind:

A. Nature of MR
1. Broad: Guilty mind or morally culp ste of mind= culp meaning of MR is guilty is comm SH of off w/ ANY MBW ste of mind w/o regard for int or unint 2. Narrow: Men ste MUST have had regarding SH elem in def of off not guilty unless has men ste spec in def (even if had a culp frame of mind)

B. General issues in proving culpability

Culpability Purposely It is the actors consc obj to eng in cndt or to cause a certn reslt Knowingly The actor is aware or practically certain that his conduct will have such a result Recklessly The actor consciously disregards a subst and unjusti risk harm exist or will reslt **Must be gross deviation from std of cndt of LAC Negligent The actor should be aware of a subst and unjusti risk that harm exists or will result **Must be gross deviation from std of care of LAC

In result crimes, intent def includes a. Results that are conscious obj (what wants to occur); AND b. Results is virtually certain will occur from conduct EVEN if doesnt want them to arise SH is not a sep element 1. Proving intent: look into mind of and deter purpose for acting or whether knew certain to occur 2. Person ordinarily intends the foreseeable conseq of his actions 3. Men ste of regarding social harm elements in def of offense 4. isnt guilty of offense (even w/ culpable mind) if lacks men ste sp in def of crime

Under MPC: MR adopted elem app so pros must prove evry mat elem of off w/ the part ste of
mind required in def or no conviction (except strict liability in 2.05) Diff from CL bc: 1. Abandons countless CL and pre-code ST terms w/ 4 culpable terms Under MPC: kinds of culp (many ste adopted 2.02/ elemental approach) a. Purposely: conscious object for result b. Knowingly: aware or pract certain of result c. Recklessly: conscious disregard for (involves conscious risk creation) and gross deviation from law abiding citizen d. Negligently: should be aware

3. Prin of ST constr in 2.02 resolves many of the CL/pre-code MR issues plaguing the Ct

C. SL (strict liability):
Doesnt expr poss any men ste elem so all needed is AR but just bc a ST is silent on MR can still be interp as req some min level of MR (so not really SL) Ex: ST rape 1. As to age of victim: if below a certain age, has no ability to consent to intercourse 2. Pun may be severe 3. Stigma applies (prob) *Some stes allow for mistake of age Sometimes not all elem have a MR req: typically the elem that doesnt req culp is attend circum 1. ST created crime to protect health, safety and welf of comm Running a traffic light 1. Viol may inj many people 2. The std is reas (dont speed or take drugs) 3. Pun is relatively mild (ticket or fine) 4. Very little stigma attached to commit off

IIV. Causation: links act to harm

A. Actual
1. But for test: Result wouldnt have occurred BF s conduct Ex. Homicide: would victim die if she did? Wouldve died= not AC Wouldnt have died= AC Maj: Cause in fact of offense if result wouldnt have happened in absence of s conduct Min: Subst fact test when 2 s act indep comm 2 sep acts which either alone is suff for result **Aggravation w/o acceleration is not suff for causation

B. Proximate or Leg Causation (leg construct)

1. Determines who or what events that are but for should be held accountable for resulting harm 2. Obj std: not what thought/ Did IC exist to break link bw act and SH? **A person/event cant be a PC of harm unless she/it is the actual cause BUT a person/event can be AC w/out being PC** 1. Fores test: (In gen) if IC is foresee= no break in connection but must look at 2 things 2. Issue: Arises when intervening force (IF) Ex. A BF agent comes in into play after s vol act/omiss and bfe SH occurs Intervening causes usually: a. Acts of God (ex. events that cant be traced to any human means) b. Acts of indep 3rd p that accel/aggrv harm/ cause it to occur in unexpctd manner c. Act of omiss of victim that assists outcome Can omiss serves as superc IC and relieve wrongdoer of crim liab?

 A neg act wont cut of liab of earlier positive act (nothing wont superc something) no matter how unfores omiss may be Keep in mind abt PC: 1. Not abt appl hard and fast rules leading to sci correct answr 2. An effort of fact finder to determine whether its proper to hold crim resp for proh result (based on policy consid or matters of fairness)

Under MPC: BFC only casual req that should be imposed gen and remaining issue is proper
scope of liab in light of actors culp Kibbe: Ste crim case in Fed Ct bc he filed petition for writ of habeas corpus (after exhausted ste appeals, can file w/ Fed Ct bc believes that contin impris viol Fed law or US const Must convince Fed Ct What kind of IC? 1. Dependent /Respondent IC? Suff fors and rel to conduct so FAIR to hold resp for what happen Ex. Someone dies in surgery after you shoot them 2. Coincidental/Independent IC? Suff indep of s conduct so UNFAIR to hold resp (no PC) Ex. Shot someone and then hit by lightening Lightening= coincidence/ no fors so breaks conn/link (Exception: Shot someone and leave under a tree during lightening storm so struck by lightening is fores)

VI. Criminal Homicide: unlawful killing of HB

CL No distinction so DP for all crim hom Degrees 1st and 2nd murder Vol and Invol mansl MPC Murder Mansl (RKL and EEMD) Crim Neg Hom

(must be alive/fetus only if proscribed by ST)

Under MPC:
Purposely, knowingly, recklessly or neg cause D of another HB

A. Intentional killings 1. Murder Under CL:

ULK of HB w/ MAFT (becme arb way for jdgs to just ANY men ste suff to find liab for murder) MAFT: 4 stes of mind 1. IK= awrness that D wld rslt frm act even if no part desire to achv tht result (Int /knwg hom= murder unl killed in HP from adq prvc/ making it mansl) 2. Int to cause griev bodily harm (IGBH)= same std as abve (if d act resulted)

3. Depr hrt: unint hom undr depr mind/ aban or malig hrt = extr RKL reg hom risk so liab for murder w/o IKI but w/ WW disreg for unreas HR 4. ICF (origin of felony murder): SL for hom commit during comm of felony

Under Degrees App: (Penn leg 1794 then adopted by maj of juris)
**Enacted to confine DP to part heinous murders (DP for any CL murder until then) Distinguish bw more and less culp: Two kinds of murder: a. 1st = int and unlaw killing of HB w/ malice and w/ prem and delib b. 2nd =All other kinds of murder Was it prem and delib? Factors to consider 1. No prvcation from deceased? 2. Conduct and stmt of before and after? 3. Threats/declarations before and during? 4. Ill-will or prev differences b/w parties 5. Dealing of lethal blows after rendered helpless? 6. Evi that killing was done in brutal manner? Premeditated: To think about before hand (quantity of thought/can happen in an instant) Deliberate: weighed conduct and conseq before acting (quality of time) Thought process undisturbed by hot blood thats long enough to for to have 2nd look

Under MPC: Criminal Hom is murder when:

1. Purposely/ Knowingly; or 2. Extreme Recklessness (manifesting extreme indiff to value of human life and gross dev) Above ord RKL **NO MAFT required **No cooling off period or time limit **No req prvcation (emotional events from any time may qualify for EEM)

2. Manslaughter: Unlawful hom w/o MAFT Under CL: No distinction from murder and mans (at 1st)
Voluntary: int killing that has 1. Adq prvcation from event below 2. HOP: something that unhinges ones reas= jealousy, fear, envy 3. Sudden (no cooling off period) 4. Link bw provocation and killing Leg Adq Prvcation: Events that generate reduction in pun for killing under CL a. Battery, mutual combat or aggr assault b. Adultery c. Serious injury to a close relative d. Illegal arrest

Mere words are usually not enough but words spoken by the victim that informed of an event that would have been legally prvcative (if had seen it) may be enough Leg-Adq Prvcation Test: to enflame the passions of a reas man (ordinary person)

Under MPC: No req of sudden like CL

1. Mans a. Recklessly (Presumed if engaged in or accomplice of the act) b. Under EEMD from viewpoint of reas person in s situation **Obj view of subj ste of mind EEMD: *** Doesnt have to be mental illness 2. Criminally neg hom

3. Felony Murder: relieve pros of proving MR req w/ regard to death

Limits on FM:

Under CL: 1. Inherently dangerous:

Maj: Case by case Min: In the abstract 2. In furtherance of the felony: Maj: Agency Min: PC

Under Degrees app:

Listed in ST (certain ones for both degrees)

Under MPC:
FM very limited under MPC to BAARRK Murder CL: (exp or imp malice) Intent to kill Intent to cause SBI Depraved heart Felony murder Mans: CL Voluntary=mitigated murder w/LAP Involuntary: unint w/o malice

Degrees 1st = p & d 2nd = w/o p & d Certain FM

MPC Purposely/Knowingly or Extreme Recklessness

Degrees SBI DH Other FM

MPC Recklessly EEMD

Criminally Neg homicide under MPC is another crime by itself (not another form of mansl)

VII. Unintentional Killings: A. Result of unjustified risk taking Under CL:

1. Grossly neg unint mansl: a. Gross deviations from std of care used by ord person where b. Neg conduct can reas be said to manifest wanton or reckless disregard for human life (HL) 2. DH murder a. Life endang conduct thats so reckless it shows a wanton indiff to HL

Under app: 1. Malice is express or implied

a. Express: show deliberate intent to unlawfully take away HL b. Implied: No considerable prvcation seen or circum show abandoned and malignant heart Ill will or hatred for victim isnt nec malice so if the killing is est as result of intent act committed w/ express or implied malice, no men ste is needed to show MAFT

Under MPC: B. Unlawful Conduct

1. Felony-Murder Rule

Under CL:
Inherently dang felony: most common limitation on FM rule Diff bw implied malice (DH) and felony murder a. IM= kills a person while comm act which poses a high prob of resulting in D, trier of fact MAY infer killed w/ MAFT b. FM= if inherently dang act is a felony, is DEEMED to have killed w/ MAFT as a matter of law Res Gestae Doctrine: FM rule applies even after felony is tech completed, if killing occurs during escape from the scene of the crime or if at least part of one continuous transaction.

V. Liability for conduct of another

A. Accomplice
1. General liability Under CL: divided into 1. Prin a. P in 1st deg= one who actually comm crime (by his own hand, inani ag, innocent human agent)

b. P in 2nd deg= aided, counseled, commanded, or enc comm is his pres (act/constr) 2. Accessories a. ABF= aided, counseled, commanded, or enc comm w/o being present at crime b. AAF= ass felon to hinder detec, arrest, trial or pun (knows of s guilt) Acces cant be tried w/o consent before prin or convicted of a higher crime than prin

Under app:
1. 1st =perpetrators and 2. 2nd =abettors and accessories before the fact (inciters), after the fact (criminal protectors) Under MPC: 2. Elements of accomplice liability: One is liab as an accomp to crime of another if a. Gave ass or enc or failed to perf a leg duty to prevent it; with b. Intent to promote or facil comm of the crime 3. Mens Rea Intent to prom or facil a. Intent: purpose or knowledge CL Prin in 1st / 2nd ABF/AAF Degrees 1st = perp 2nd = abettors/acces MPC

Primary Accomplice

4. Actus Reus Ass or enc to comm of crime Accomplice Mental State CL Int to aid primary party and Int tht ass result in comm of (Both needed) 1. Solicitation 2. Active Assistance 3. Failure to prevent (leg duty) 4. Encouragment (Only need one) *Attmpt and fail no active ass MPC Purposely promoting and facilitating 1. Solicits 2. Aids 3. Agrees to aid 4. Attempts to aid 5. Legal duty to prevent (Adds attempt)

Act

VI. Capital Murder

A. Constitutional and Policy Debate
Deterrence? Consensus that it does little to reduce crime rates

B. Quest for Reliable Procedures

What makes a murder DP eligible? (Narrow class of offenses=the worst of the worst) 1. At least one aggr circum 2. Must be murder/FM

DP must not be: 1. Unnec wanton and cruel 2. Grossly out of prop w/crim DP case must have: 1. Bifurcated trial (Conviction and sentencing) 2. Provide specific std and instructions to jury 3. Individualized consideration of mitigating factors (for ) 4. Have a jury 5. Have one auto appeal a. Question of Racial Discrimination Must prove ind discrimination not institutionalized

b. Victim Impact Evidence Victim impact evidence: evi abt impact of victims death on the family and the comm (Cant consider the familys op abt the sentence)

C. Substantive Limitations on DP
Whos not eligible for DP? 1. Under 18 2. Mentally retarded 3. Insane as to punishment 4. Rape Non-trigger person eligible for DP? Must be maj part and display reckless indiff to the value of human life Prosec doesnt have to prove IK

10