Criminal Law and Procedure Flashcards
(23 cards)
murder
At common law, murder was the killing of a human being with malice aforethought.
The mental state of malice aforethought could be established with any one of the following states of mind:
(i) intent to kill;
(ii) intent to cause serious bodily harm;
(iii) reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (“depraved heart”); or
(iv) the intent to commit a dangerous felony (“felony murder”).
transferred intent
malice aforethought can transfer from one victim to another, so if another victim dies even though defendant had malice aforethought toward someone else, that intent transfers
inherently dangerous felonies
BARRK
burglary
arson
robbery
rape
kidnapping
M’Naghten Rule
form of insanity defense: a disease of the mind caused a defect of reason, such that the defendant lacked the ability at the time of his actions to either (a) know the wrongfulness of his actions or (b) understand the nature and quality of his actions
accomplice
An accomplice is one who (i) with the intent to assist the principal and the intent that the principal commit the substantive offense (ii) actually aids, counsels, or encourages the principal before or during the commission of the crime
Remember: mere knowledge that a crime would result from sale of ordinary goods at ordinary prices is NOT enough for accomplice liability
attempt
attempt requires 2 elements:
(1) specific intent to commit the target crime
(2) an overt act (substantial step) in furtherance of that attempt
Remember: transferred intent does not apply to arson
burglary
breaking and entering into a dwelling house of another, at night, with the specific intent to commit a felony therein
Note: it doesn’t matter if you actually end up committing the felony
intoxication defense
intoxication is a defense to a specific intent crime
HOWEVER, if you form the intent before you become intoxicated, and then drink to work up the courage to commit the crime, then you cannot rely on intoxication as a defense
exclusionary rule in grand jury
the exclusionary rule does not apply in grand jury proceedings
standing to object to search of another’s home
A person generally does not have standing to complain about a warrantless search of another’s home unless the home was also his home or he was at least an overnight guest in the home
open fields doctrine
anything outside the curtilage (immediate area surrounding your home: house + out buildings) is subject to police entry and search, because that is all held out to the public –> not protected by the 4A
school searches
no need for probable cause; school officials just need reasonable grounds for suspicion
Miranda waivers and possible charges
police do not have to give detainees information about possible charges in order for the waiver to be valid
post-charge line-up right to attorney
a post-charge lineup is a critical stage of prosecution at which time defendant has a 6th Amendment right to counsel
Remember: right to counsel attaches as soon as the defendant is in sight of the identification witnesses
stop and frisk
police
school searches
school search will be upheld only if it offers a moderate chance of finding evidence of wrongdoing, the measures adopted to carry out the search are reasonably related to the objectives of the search, and the search is “not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.”
arson
the malicious burning of the dwelling of another. charring = enough
malice is satisfied by intent or reckless disregard of an obvious risk
use of technology for surveillance
police may fly over an area to observe it with the naked eye, and even a low flyover by a helicopter to view inside a partially covered building is permissible. This is true even if the area is within the curtilage.
However, the police may not use technologically enhanced methods that are not available to the public to search areas
automobile exception to warrant requirement
If the police have probable cause to believe that an automobile contains contraband or evidence of a crime, they may search whatever area of the car that may contain the object of their search without having to get a warrant. Probable cause to search is defined as reasonable grounds for believing that a particular item of seizure is located at a particular place
search incident to lawful arrest
limited to wingspan
if you’re in a car, you can only search the passenger area, and ONLY for something connected to the arrest, or for the police officer’s safety
Terry stop
a police officer may stop a person without probable cause for arrest if she has an articulable and reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
in such circumstances, if the officer reasonably believes that the person may be armed and dangerous, she may conduct a protective frisk.
the scope of the frisk is limited to a patdown of the outer clothing for concealed instruments of assault, but the officer may reach into the suspect’s clothing and seize any item that the officer reasonably believes, based on its “plain feel,” is a weapon or contraband.
remedy for 6th Amendment violation
usually, a statement obtained in violation of the 6A is inadmissible
Exception: a statement obtained in violation of a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel may be used to impeach the defendant’s contrary trial testimony, which is what is happening here.
jury instructions
a jury instruction that places the burden on the defendant to disprove an element of the crime is unconstitutional, because prosecution has the burden of proving every element beyond a reasonable doubt
but jury instructions on defenses that place the burden on the defendant are constitutional
