General Criminal Law – General Elements Flashcards
(40 cards)
Mens Rea: You aimed and shot the arrow at William Tell with the purpose of killing him rather than with the intent of hitting the apple on his head. (Tell is the national hero of Switzerland who was required to shoot an apple off his son’s head.)
Purposely
Mens Rea: You know that you are a poor shot, and when shooting at the apple on William Tell’s head, you knew that you were practically certain to kill him.
Knowingly
Mens Rea-You clearly appreciated and knew the risk of shooting the arrow at William Tell with your eyes closed. Nevertheless, you proceeded to shoot the arrow despite the fact that this was a gross deviation from the standard of care that a law-abiding person would exhibit.
Recklessly
Mens Rea- You claim that you honestly believed that you were such an experienced hunter that there was no danger in shooting the apple from William Tell’s head. This was a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would practice under the circumstances.
Negligently
require only an actus reus and do not require proof of a mens rea. e.g. Welfare crimes (food, drug, transportation)
Strict liability crimes
a mental determination to accomplish a specific result.
specific intent
simply an intent to commit the actus reus or criminal act.
General intent
no requirement that prosecutors demonstrate that an offender possessed an intent to violate the law, an awareness that the act is a crime, or an awareness that the act will result in a particular type of harm.
General intent
The prosecutor is required to demonstrate that the offender possessed the intent to commit the actus reus and then is required to present additional evidence that the defendant possessed the specific intent to accomplish a particular result.
Specific Intent
an individual who enters a cabin to escape the cold and after entering decides to steal food and clothing. In this instance, the intent did not COINCIDE with the criminal act, and the defendant will not be held liable for burglary.
chronological concurrence
every crime … there must exist a union or joint operation of act and intent or criminal negligence.
mens rea+actus rea
concurrence
causation is central to criminal law and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The requirement of causality is based on two considerations
Individual Responsibility/ Fairness
causation is central to criminal law and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The requirement of causality is based on two considerations
-Individual Responsibility/ Fairness
A man plans to poison his wife (mens rea) and later accidentally hits her with a car (actus reus). is it murder?
There is no concurrence, so it’s not murder.
An individual aims a gun at the victim, pulls the trigger, and kills the victim. “But for” the shooter’s act, the victim would be alive.
Cause in Fact
requires the jury to determine whether it is fair or just to hold a defendant legally responsible for an injury or death.
Proximate cause analysis
requires the jury to determine whether it is fair or just to hold a defendant legally responsible for an injury or death.
Proximate Cause Analysis
A speeding driver causes a minor accident, but the victim suffers a heart attack due to a rare condition.
Proximate Cause (Legal Cause):
was not forseeable
Dependent Intervening Causes:
Foreseeable (e.g., negligent medical treatment).
Unforeseeable (e.g., a lightning strike).
Independent Intervening Causes
crimes that are NOT inherently evil:
mala PROHIBITA:
crimes that are inherently evil.
mala in se:
an intent to kill with ill will and hatred.
malice aforethought:
Mala in se or prohibita?: offenses ranging from tax evasion to carrying a concealed weapon, leaving the scene of an accident, and being drunk and disorderly in public.
Mala Prohibita
