Crim Law Flashcards

Question

causation

Answer 1

D’s conduct must be both the cause in fact and proximate cause of the victim’s death Cause in fact Result would not have occurred but for the D’s conduct Proximate causation Result is a natural and probable consequence of the conduct even if D didn’t anticipate the precise manner in which the result occurred Supserseding factors break the chain Rules of causation An act that hastens an inevitable result Simultaneous acts of 2 or more persons may be independently sufficient causes of single result Limitations Year and a day rule - majority abolished For D to be liable of homicide death of victim must occur within one year and one day from infliction of the injury or would Intervening acts Shields D if act is a coincidence or outside the foreseeable sphere of risk created by the D 3rd party’s negligent medical care and the victim’s refusal of medical treatment for religious reasons are both forseeable risks so D still liable

Answer 2

Unlawful application of force to the person of another resulting in either bodily injury or an offenseive touching Need not be intentional force need not be applied directly General intent crime Consent as a defense to simple battery Aggravated batter battery with a deadly weapon Resulting in serious bodily harm Of a child, woman, or police officer

Answer 3

An attempt to commit battery Intentional creation (other than by mere words) or reasonable apprehension of imminent bodily harm Aggravated Use of a deadly or dangerous weapon or With the intent to rape, maim or murder

Answer 4

Unlawful confinement of a person without the person’s valid consent Confinement must interfere substantially w/ victime liberty Confinement if no reasonable alternative routes

Answer 5

unlawful confinement of a person that involves either Some movement of the victim or Concealment of the victim in a secret place aggravated kidnapping For ransom For purpose of committing other crimes For offensive purposes Child stealing ( child incapable of giving valid consent)

Answer 6

Traditional Unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman by a man, not her husband, without her effective consent Modern Gender neutral sexual assault Slightest penetration is sufficient Lack of effective consent is intercourse accomplished by Actual force Threats of great and immediate bodily harm Victim incapable of consentiing (unconscious, intoxication, mental condition) Victim fraudulently caused to believe that the act is not intercourse Statutory rape Carnal knowledge of a person under the age of consent Strict liability crime Mistake as to age is not a defense

Answer 7

Taking and carrying away of tangible personal prop of another without consent with intent to permanently deprive Asportation Slightest movement of prop is enough Possession Prop must be taken from custody or possession of another If D had possession of prop at time of taking crime not larceny Custody vs possesion possession= if given discretionary authority over the prop Intent to permanently deprive At the time of the taking D intended to permanently deprive a person of their prop Sufficient intent Intent to create a substantial risk of loss, or an intent to sell or pledge goods to owner Insufficient intent Belief prop is D’s Intent to borrow prop Intent to keep prop as repayment of debt Possibly sufficient intent D intends to pay for the goods (if goods not for sale) or Intends to collect a reward from the owner ( if no intent to return goods absent a reward Abandoned lost or mislaid prop Larceny can be committed with lost or mislaid prop or prop that has been delivered by mistake Can’ be changed with larceny for abandoned material Continuing trespass D wrongfully takes prop w/o intent to permanently deprive and later decides to keep it= larceny Original taking not wrongful and later decides t keep it, it is not larceny

Answer 8

Fraudulent conversion of personal prop of another by person in lawful possession of that prop Intent Must intend to defraud Intent to restore Restore exact prop taken = not embezzlement Restore similar or substantially identical prop =embezzlement Even if money initially taken and other money of identical value intended to return Claim of right Embezzlement is not committed if the conversion is pursuant to a claim of right to the prop Notes for MBE Trustee often embezzler Person does not have to carry away to be an embezzler Embezzler does not have to get the benefit

Answer 9

Obtaining TITLE to personal prop of another by intentional false statement of past or existing fact with intent to defraud Misrepresentation required Victim must actually be deceived by, or act in reliance on the misrepresentation and must be major factor of victim passing title Traditional D’s misrep must have related to a past or present fact and false promises to do something in the future not sufficient Modern- majority Any false rep suffices including false promise to perform in future

Answer 10

victim is tricked to give up custody or POSSESSION of prop

Answer 11

Taking of personal prop of another from the other’s person or presence by force or threats with intent to permanently deprive Requires that D use force or threats to obtain or retain the victim’s prop Pickpocketing = larceny Notes for MBE Presence requirement is very broadly drawn Action such as ripping necklace from neck = sufficient force or threat of force Threat must be threat of imminent harm

Answer 12

Corrupt collection of an unlawful fee by an officer under color of office Modern Extortion (blackmail) obtaining prop by means of threats to do har mor expose information Some statutes crime complete when threats made with intent to obtain prpop

Answer 13

Receiving possession and control of stolen personal prop known to have been obtained by another person with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of their interest in it

Answer 14

Making or altering a writing with apparent legal significance so that it is false with intent to defraud

Answer 15

Breaking and entering of dwelling of another at nightime wih intent to commit a felony in the structure Modern No need to break just enter plane Doesn’t have to be at night Doesnt have to be dwelling structure Doesnt have to have intent to commit a felony,, misdemeanor theft is enough Breaking Can be actual- involving some force however slight Constructive - breaking by fraud or threat Going beyond scope of permission No actual breaking for person to come uninvited through wide open door or window Wideopen = no breaking Person pushes interior door to another room = breaking exists Entering - when any part of the body crosses into the structure Dwelling house of another - at CL can’t be barn or commercial Intent to commit a felony therein - must exist at the time of breaking and entering

Answer 16

Malicious burning of dwelling of another Modern Include explosion Expand prop type to include commericial structures, cars, trains, etc Malice No specific intent required Acting with reckless disregard of obvious risk that structure would burn will suffice Damage required Destruction of structure or even significant damage not required Scorching (blackening by smoke or discoloration by heat) is not sufficient Charring is sufficient Houseburning At CL building had to be house of another ( no insurance during those times) Definition at cl Malicious burning of one’s own dwelling if the structure is situated either in a city or town or so near to other houses as to create a danger to them

Answer 17

insanity intoxication infancy self dense duress mistake or ignorance of fact/law entrapment

Answer 18

m'naughten test D entitled to acquittal if disease of the mind caused defect of reason such that D lacked ability to know wrongfulness of actions or understand nature and quality of actions Irresistible impulse test D entitled to acquittal if because of mental illness, unable to control actions or conform conduct to the law Durham test D entitled to acquittal if crime was product of mental illness Only applicable in new hampshire Model penal code test D entitled to acquittal if D had mental disease or defect and, as a result, lacked substantial capacity to either appreciate criminality of conduct or conform to the law Procedural issues Burdens of proof and persuasion All D presumed sane D must raise insanity issue D must prove when raised by preponderance of evidence MPC require prosecution to prove D was sane beyond a reasonable doubt D may raise insanity defense at arraignment but doesnt have to

Answer 19

caused by any substances Voluntary If it is the result of the intentional taking w/o duress, of substance known to be intoxicating Defense to specific intent crimes Addicts and alcoholics who are intoxicated when they commit a crime are considered to be voluntarily intoxicated rather than involuntarily intoxicated Involuntary intoxication Results from taking substance w/o knowledge of its nature, under duress, or pursuant to medical advice while unaware of intoxicating effect Can be defense to all crimes

Answer 20

Under 7= no criminal liability 7-14= rebuttable presumption child unable to understand wrongulness of acts 14+= treated as adult

Answer 21

Justifiication defenses arise when society has deemed that although the defendant committed a proscribed act, they should not be punished bc the circumstances justify the action Nondeadly force Person w/o fault may use such force as person reasonably believes is necessary to protect themselves from imminent use of unlawful force Deadly force Person may use deadly force in self-defense if person Is w/o fault Is confronted with unlawful force Reasonably believes they are threatened with imminent death or great bodily harm No duty to retreat under majority view Retreat before use if victim can safely do so unless- minority Attack occurs in own home Attack occurs while victim making lawful arrest Assailant is in process of robbing victim Right of aggressor to use self-defense Effectively withdraw from confrontation and communicate to the other their desire to do so or Victim of initial aggression suddenly escalate the minor fight into a deadly altercation and the initial aggressor has no chance to withdraw Defense of other Right to defend others if defendant reasonably believes person has right to use force in own defense All needed is reasonable appearance of right to use force CL= special relationship Defense of a dwelling Person may use nondeadly force in defense of their dwelling when and to extent that they reasonably believe that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate another’s unlawful entry Deadly force may be used only to prevent a violent entry and when the person reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to prevent a personal attack on themselves or another in the dwelling o Defense of other prop Defending possession Reasonable nondeadly force may be used to defend prop in one’s possession from what they reasonably believe is an imminent unlawful interference Regaining possession Can only regain prop that reasonably believe was wrongfully taken only if they are in immediate pursuit of the taker

Answer 22

Defense to crime, other than intentional homicide that D reasonably believed another person would imminently inflict death or great bodily harm if D did not commit crime Always involves threat by a human Threats to prop Traditionally threats to prop not sufficient modern allow for threats to prop to give rise to duress defense assuming value of prop outweighs the harm done to society by commission of crime Causing death of another person to protect prop never justified Necessity Defense that D reasonably believed commission of crime was necessary to avoid imminent and greater injury to society CL - natural forces Modern cases abandoned natural force requirement Not available if D is at fault in creating situation requiring that they choose b/n two evils

Answer 23

Relevant to criminal liability if shows D lacked state of mind required for crime Specific intent a mistake can be unreasonable Any other state of mind a mistake must be reasonable Mistake or ignorance of law Generally not a defense that D believed that their actiivity would not be a crime,even if that belief was reasonable and based on the advice of an attorney Exceptions Statute proscribing their conduct was not published or made reasonably available prior to the conduct There was reasonable reliance on a statute or judicial decision Some jurisdiction there was reasonable reliance on official interpretation or advice

Answer 24

Exists only if Occurs if the intent to commit the crime originated with law enforcement D not predisposed to commit crime prior to contact by the gov Merely providing the opportunity for a predisposed person to commit a crime is not entrapment Can’t be entrapped by a private citizen

Answer 25

Perjury Is intentional taking a false oath in regard to a material matter Subordination of perjury consists of procuring or inducing another to commit perjury Bribery CL = corrupt payment or receipt of anything of value for official action modern= extended to nonpublic officials and ither the offering of bribe or taking of bribe may constitute the crime

Crim Law Flashcards

(49 cards)