Mens Rea

Question 1

Mens rea

Answer 1

the person’s mental state

Question 2

Mens Rea MPC

Answer 2

Purpose
Knowledge
Recklessness
Negligent

Question 3

Mens Rea TPC

Answer 3

Intentional:
Knowingly:
Reckless:
Criminal negligence:

Question 4

Purpose MPC

Answer 4

Defendant desires a result (subjective)
Conscious object or intend to do an act that will have a certain result and
If the element involves attendant circumstances the def is aware of those circumstances

Question 5

Knowledge - MPC

Answer 5

Def foresees a result as highly likely but it does not matter to them whether it occurs or not (subjective)
Aware of the nature of conduct or that circumstances exist
Aware that the conduct is reasonably certain to cause the result

Question 6

Recklessly - MPC

Answer 6

Def consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk (subjective)

Question 7

Negligent - MPC

Answer 7

Def should be aware of substantial and unjustifiable risk and conduct is a gross deviation from the standard of care of a reasonable person in defendants situation (objective)

Question 8

Intentional TPC

Answer 8

Intentional: A person acts intentionally, or with intent, with respect to the nature of his conduct or to a result of his conduct when it is his conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduct or cause the result.

Question 9

Knowingly TPC

Answer 9

Knowingly: A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to the nature of his conduct or to circumstances surrounding his conduct when he is aware of the nature of his conduct or that the circumstances exist. A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, with respect to a result of his conduct when he is aware that his conduct is reasonably certain to cause the result.

Question 10

Reckless - TPC

Answer 10

Reckless:A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor’s standpoint.

Question 11

Criminal Negligence TPC

Answer 11

Criminal negligence:A person acts with criminal negligence, or is criminally negligent, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor’s standpoint

Question 12

Strict liability

Answer 12

A prosecutor does not need to prove culpable intent in strict liability crimes - only that the conduct occurred

Question 13

no Mens rea requirement

Answer 13

Scieter: a presumption that criminal statutes require the degree of knowledge sufficient to “mak[e] a person legally responsible for the consequences of his or her act or omission. (knowledge or intent)

Question 14

Omission of mens rea

Answer 14

Look to statutory history - if nothing - look to purpose of law and penalty imposed - more prison less likely to be strict liability

Question 15

Strict liability Common law

Answer 15

Assumption is strict liability

Question 16

Strict Liability MPC

Answer 16

Must be legislative intent for strict liability

Question 17

Strict Liability TPC

Answer 17

Must be legislative intent for strict liability

Question 18

Intoxication

Answer 18

Very high bar - must be so intoxicated that mens rea is impossible - involuntary intoxication is a complete defense

Question 19

Intoxication Common Law

Answer 19

Under common law being intoxicated or drugged could negate the mens rea for “specific intent” crimes but not for “general intent” crimes

Question 20

Intoxication MPC

Answer 20

MPC § 2.08 Intoxication Voluntary intoxication a defense if it negates an element of the offense. If recklessness is an element of the offense Δ intoxication is immaterial if due to the intoxication “Δ is unaware of a risk of which he would have been aware if he were sober.”

Question 21

Intoxication TPC

Answer 21

(a) Voluntary intoxication does not constitute a defense to the commission of crime.

. . . . statute barred use of evidence of voluntary intoxication to negate the culpable mental state of a crime

Question 22

General intent:

Answer 22

The intent to cause the action - required mental state entails only an intent to do the act that causes the harm

Question 23

Specific intent:

Answer 23

Do a further act or achieve a consequence - required mental state entails an intent to cause the resulting harm

Question 24

Mistake of Fact

Answer 24

A defendant’s honest but mistaken belief that factual circumstances existed that would have made his or her actions not criminal due to the absence of the required mens rea

Question 25

Mistake of Fact MPC

Answer 25

(1) Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact or law is a defense if: (a) the ignorance or mistake negatives the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense; or (b) the law provides that the state of mind established by such ignorance or mistake constitutes a defense.

Question 26

Mistake of Fact TPC

Answer 26

(a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor through mistake formed a reasonable belief about a matter of fact if his mistaken belief negated the kind of culpability required for commission of the offense. (b) Although an actor's mistake of fact may constitute a defense to the offense charged, he may nevertheless be convicted of any lesser included offense of which he would be guilty if the fact were as he believed.

Question 27

Mistake of Law MPC

Answer 27

(2) Although ignorance or mistake would otherwise afford a defense to the offense charged, the defense is not available if the defendant would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed. In such case, however, the ignorance or mistake of the defendant shall reduce the grade and degree of the offense of which he may be convicted to those of the offense of which he would be guilty had the situation been as he supposed. (3) A belief that conduct does not legally constitute an offense is a defense to a prosecution for that offense based upon such conduct when: (a) the statute or other enactment defining the offense is not known to the actor and has not been published or otherwise reasonably made available prior to the conduct alleged; or (b) he acts in reasonable reliance upon an official statement of the law, afterward determined to be invalid or erroneous, contained in (i) a statute or other enactment; (ii) a judicial decision, opinion or judgment; (iii) an administrative order or grant of permission; or (iv) an official interpretation of the public officer or body charged by law with responsibility for the interpretation, administration or enforcement of the law defining the offense. (4) The defendant must prove a defense arising under Subsection (3) of this Section by a preponderance of evidence.

Question 28

Mistake of Law TPC

Answer 28

(a) It is no defense to prosecution that the actor was ignorant of the provisions of any law after the law has taken effect. (b) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution that the actor reasonably believed the conduct charged did not constitute a crime and that he acted in reasonable reliance upon: (1) an official statement of the law contained in a written order or grant of permission by an administrative agency charged by law with responsibility for interpreting the law in question; or (2) a written interpretation of the law contained in an opinion of a court of record or made by a public official charged by law with responsibility for interpreting the law in question. (c) Although an actor's mistake of law may constitute a defense to the offense charged, he may nevertheless be convicted of a lesser included offense of which he would be guilty if the law were as he believed.