Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
134 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Where can a crime be prosecuted?
|
A crime may be prosecuted in any state where
1) an ACT that was part of the crime took place; or 2) the RESULT took place |
|
What is the prosecution's burden of proof?
|
to prove EACH element beyond a reasonable doubt
|
|
NY: What are the two types of defenses
|
Defenses: Prosc must disprove beyond reas doibt
Affirmative defenses: D must prove by preponderance of ev |
|
Felony
|
punished by DEATH or IMPRISONMENT for MORE than 1 YR.
|
|
Misdemeanor
|
punished by FINE and/or IMPRISONMENT for NO MORE than 1 YR
|
|
Essential elements of crime
|
1. ACT or FAILURE to act
2. MENTAL STATE 3. CAUSATION (actual & prox) 4. CONCURRENCE |
|
What type of physical act can be the basis for crim liability?
|
All bodily movements that are VOLUNTARY
|
|
What types of physical acts cannot be the basis for crim liability/ are not crim "acts"
|
1. an act that is not the product of D's VOLITION (i.e. D is pushed)
2. sleepwalking/ uncons conduct 3. a reflex/ a convulsion |
|
Omissions
|
3 requirements, satisfy ALL
1. Legal duty to act- 5 ways to create: a. statute; b. K (babysit, lifeguard, dr); c. status rela (parent-child; H-W); d. voluntary assumption of care e. D creates the peril--> duty to help 2. knowledge of the facts giving rise to duty (i.e. if mom not @ pool, no duty to save son) 3. ability to help |
|
What are the 4 mental states?
|
1. Specific intent
2. Malice 3. General intent 4. Strict liability |
|
Specific intent
|
the crime requires not just the desire to do the act, but also the desire to achieve a specific result
|
|
What are the specific intent crimes?
|
There are 11.
Crimes against the person: 1. Assault 2. 1st Deg Premed Murder Property Crimes 3. Larceny 4. Embezzlement 5. False pretenses 6. Robbery 7. Forgery 8. Burglary Inchoate crimes 9. Solicitation 10. Conspiracy 11. Attempt |
|
What are defenses to specific intent crimes?
|
1. Voluntary intoxication
2. Unreasonable mistake of fact These defenses are ONLY available for SI crimes |
|
Malice
|
D acts intentionally or w/ reckless disregard of an obvious or known risk
|
|
General intent
|
D is generally aware of the factors constituting the crime; need not intend specific result
(jury can infer GI from simply D's doing the act) |
|
What are the general intent crimes?
|
Battery
Forceable rape False imprisonment Kidnapping |
|
Strict liability
|
When the crime requires simply doing the act; no mental state is needed
|
|
What are the strict liability crimes?
|
1. Public welfare offenses (regulatory offenses that implicate public health or safety, typically carry small penalties)
i.e. transferring UNREGISTERED firearms, selling CONTAMINATED food, shipping ADULTERATED drugs in interstate commerce 2. Statutory rape = having sex w. someone under the age of consent |
|
New York mental states
|
1. Intent
2. Knowingly 3. Recklessly 4. Negligently 5. Strict Liability |
|
NY Intent
|
D's conscious desire is to accomplish a certain result (what D wants to do)
|
|
NY knowingly
|
D is aware of what he is doing (Aware that it is practically certain his conduct will cause the result)
|
|
NY recklessly
|
D is aware of a subst & unjustifiable risk + consciously disregards the risk
|
|
NY negligently
|
D should have been aware of a subst & unjustifiable risk
|
|
NY strict liability
|
no liability required
|
|
Causation
|
2 types, need to prove both
1. Actual (but for) causation 2. Proximate (legal) causation |
|
Actual (but for) causation
|
D is an actual cause (cause in fact) if the bad result would not have happened BUT FOR D's conduct
EXCEPT: accelerating cause is also an actual cause (i.e. A stabs V, causing fatal wound, but before V dies, D shoots him and kills him. D is the accelerating cause and is guilty) |
|
Proximate (legal) causation
|
D is a proximate cause if the bad result is a NATURAL + PROBABLE consequence of D's conduct
2 applications 1. Intervening causes: D IS NOT a prox cause if an UNFORESEEABLE INTERVENING event causes the bad result 2. Eggshell victim: D IS the prox cause even if V's pre-existing weakness contributed to the bad result |
|
Eggshell victim
|
D will still be a proximate cause even if the victim's pre-existing weakness contributed to the bad result
i.e. D shhots V, V taken to hospital, where he loses a lot of blood during surgery bc of his blood clotting disease. D is still the prox cause of V's death |
|
Concurrence Principle
|
D must have the required mental state at the same time as he engages in the culpable act
see: larceny & burglary |
|
Common law battery
|
the 1. unlawful application of 2. force to another, 3. resulting in EITHER a) bodily injury or b) an offensive touching
Mental state = gen intent |
|
Common law Assault
|
2 types
1. Attempted battery (swing & miss) 2. intentional creation (by more than mere words) of a reasonable fear in V's mind of imminent harm Mental state: specific intent |
|
NY Assault
|
intentionally causing physical injury to another (battery is not a separate crime)
1st degree assault: 2nd deg + weapon 2nd degree: intentionally causing serious injury 3rd degree: intentionally causing non serious phys injury |
|
NY Attempted assault
|
NY requires an intent to assault. So merely creating a reasonable apprehension (w/o intent to injure) is called MENACING
|
|
Year and a day rule
|
NY/Majority: Death may occur at any time
Common law: death must occur w/in a yr and a day of the homicidal act |
|
Types of common law homicide
|
1. Murder
2. Voluntary manslaughter 3. Common law involuntary manslaughter |
|
common law murder
|
causing the DEATH of ANOTHER PERSON w/ MALICE AFORETHOUGHT
mental state: intent to kill; intent to inflict serious bodily harm; extreme recklessness; felony murder |
|
What is the required mental state for common law murder?
How is it satisfied? |
The requirement of MALICE AFORETHOUGHT is satisfied if D has 1 of the 4 mental states
1. intent to KILL 2. intnet to inflict SERIOUS BODILY HARM 3. Extreme recklessness (reckless indiff to human life) 4. Intentional commission of inherently dangerous felony (felony murder) |
|
Deadly weapon rule
|
intentional use of a deadly weapon creates an inference of an intent to kill
deadly weapon = any instrument used in a manner likely to produce death or serious bodily injury |
|
Transferred intent
|
if D intends to harm one V, but accidentally harms a diff V, D's intent will xfer from the intended V to the actual V
NOTE: does NOT apply to attempts, only to crimes w/ completed harms |
|
Felony murder
|
Any killing caused during the commission of or attempt to commit a felony
Requirements: 1. D must be guilty of the underlying felony (if defense to felony, then defense to felony murder) 2. felony is inherently dangerous 3. felony must be independent of the killing- merger rule 4. killing takes place during the felony OR during immediate flight from felony 5. death is foreseeable 6. V is not co-felon |
|
When does a felony end?
|
when the felon(s) reach a place of temporary safety
|
|
NY felony murder
|
limited to BRAKES
Burglary Robbery Arson Kidnapping Escape Sexual Assault NOTE: felony murder conviction is possible even if the underlying felony is dismissed, D is acquitted, charge is not submitted to jury, so long as there is suff evidence to support the concl that D committed/ attempted to commit a BRAKES felony |
|
felony murder & vicarious liability: prox cause theory
|
if a co-felon prox causes V's death, ALL other co-felons are guilty of felony murder. This is true even if a 3rd party does the actual killing
|
|
felony murder & vicarious liability: agency theory
|
minority states: felony murder only applies if the killing is committed by one of the co-felons
|
|
NY: Vicarious liability- Non-slayer defense
|
NY provides a limited affirmative defense to felony murder if D can prove each of the following 4 things:
1. D did not kill V; 2. D did not have a deadly weapon; 3. D had no reason to believe that his co-felons had deadly weapons; and 4. D had no reason to believe his co-felons intended to do anyhting that was likely to result in death |
|
Statutory variations of common law murder:
1st degree common law murder 2nd degree common law murder |
1st degree = any killing committed with 1. PREMEDITATION AND DELIBERATION (D was calm, cool, collected)
2nd degree = all other intentional murders (depraved heart, intent to seriously injure) |
|
NY Murder: 1st degree
|
First Degree
1. intent to kill + 2. D is more than 18 yo + 3. one aggravating factor a. V is a law enf officer, ct officer, corrections employee, engaged in official duties @ time of killing + D knew/sk that V was; or b. D commits a murder for hire; or c. Felony murder, where V was intentionally killed d. killing for purpose of W intimidation e. more than 1 V intentionally killed in same crim transaction |
|
NY Murder: 2nd degree
|
1. Intentional killing that isn't 1st deg (premed & delib are irrelv) or
2. highly reckless killing demonstrating depraved indiff to human life (engage in conduct that creates a grave risk of death, generally involving more than 1 V); OR 3. felony murder, where V is not co-F and is killed unintentionally |
|
Common Law Voluntary Manslaughter
|
Intentional killing committed in heat of passion upon adequate provocation
Requirements: 1. provocation was OBJ adequate (would arouse a sudden + intense passion in reas per mind); ex: serious assault, battery, D sees adultery- NOTE at CL words not enough, but many states say otherwise 2. D was actually provoked 3. D did not have time to cool off 4. D did not actually cool off b/w prov & killing |
|
NY Voluntary Manslaughter
|
Extreme Emotional Disturbance (EED): Intentional killing committed under the influence of a REASONABLE & extreme emotional disturbance
EED is an affirmative defense to 2nd degree murder; prove by prepn of evidence |
|
Common law involuntary manslaughter: 2 types
|
1. Killing committed w/ criminal negligence; OR
2. Killing committed during the commission of a crime to which the felony murder doctrine does not apply |
|
Manslaughter in New York
|
1st degree:
1. EED manslaughter; 2. Intent to cause serious phys injury 2nd degree: 1. D is aware of and consciously disregards a subst & unjustifiable risk of death (reckless killing) 2. D commits an abortional act causing the woman death (unless allowed by stat); 3. D used duress or deception on V to get V to kill himself |
|
NY: Criminally negligent homicide
|
D should have been aware of a substantial & unjustifiable risk of death (mental state- crim negligence)
|
|
NY: Aggravated homicide
|
V of homicide is police officer killed in line of duty (aggravated murder, aggravated man1, agg man2, agg crim meg homicide)
|
|
NY: Aggravated murder
|
D is over 18 + causes death of child under 14 in an especially cruel and wanton manner
|
|
Common false imprisonment
|
Unlawful confinement of a person w/o his consent
|
|
NY Unlawful imprisonment
|
2nd degree = unlawfully restraining someone, w/o their consent + w/ knowledge that the restriction is unlawful.
1st degree: 2nd degree + risk of serious phys injury |
|
Common law kidnapping
|
False imprisonment that involves EITHER 1) moving V or 2) concealing V in a secret place
Mental state: general intent |
|
NY Kidnapping
|
2nd degree: abducting someone
1st degree: 2nd degree kidnapping + 1 of the following: a. ranson b. restraint of V for more than 12 hrs w/ intent to rape, injure rob V c. death of V |
|
Forcible rape
|
Sexual intercourse w/o V's consent accomplished by: a) force; b) threat of force; c) when V is unconscious
Mental state: general intent |
|
Statutory rape
|
sexual intercourse w/ someone under age of consent
Mental state: majority- strict liability; minority/MPC- a reasonable mistake of age is a defense |
|
NY statutory rape
|
Sexual intercourse w someone under 17 (17 is age of consent) + D is at least 21
|
|
Common Law Larceny
(Thieves Took Carmen's Purse And Isaac's Portfolio) |
Trespassory (wrongful/unlawful)
Taking & Carrying away the (asportation) Personal Propt of Another (NOTE: who had lawful custody? If D, then not guilty of larceny, even if D doesn't own propt). But D can be guilty of larceny for taking something he owns if someone else had lawful custody) w the Intent to Permanently Retain the Propt (if D intends to give back, then not larceny) |
|
Erroneous Takings Rule
|
A taking under a claim of right is NOT larceny, even if D erronenously believes the propt is his
|
|
Continuing Trespass
|
If D wrongfully takes propt, w/o intent to steal--> not larceny
But if D takes propt w/o intent to steal and then later forms intent to steal, the trespassory taking has CONTINUED and he will be guilty of larceny (exception to concurrence principle) |
|
Common law Embezzlement
|
Conversion of the personal propt of another by a person already in possession of the propt, w the intent to defraud
Mental state: specific intent to defraud (NOTE: if D intends to give the exact propt back in the exact form, no intent to defraud) |
|
CL larceny vs. CL embezzlement
|
Embezzlement requires D to already have lawful possession of the property
|
|
Possession vs. Custody
|
Possession (required for embezzlement) = authority to exercise some discretion over the propt; it involves more than custody
|
|
Common law False Pretenses
|
Obtaining title to the personal propt of another by an intentional false statement, w intent to defraud
The false statement must be of a present or past event, NOT a future promise |
|
Larceny vs. False Pretenses
|
Larceny- D only gets custody of propt; FP- D gets title/ownership
|
|
larceny by trick
|
D makes an intentional false statement, with the intent to defraud, but D obtains only custody, not title
|
|
Common law Robbery
|
Requirements
1. larceny 2. from another's person or presence 3. by force or threat of immediate force Mental state: specific intent to steal Presence = somewhere reas close to V Force = any amt of force sufficient to overcome resistance (NOT pickpocketing) threat= threat of immediate injury (if threat of future harm- extortion) |
|
Extortion
|
Larceny from another's person or presence by force or threat of FUTURE harm
aka blackmail |
|
Forgery
|
Making or altering a writing so that it is false
Mental state: with the intent to defraud (i.e. D writes out a check from V's checkbook and signing V's name) |
|
NY Larceny
|
anything considered larceny, embezzlement, false pretenses or larceny by trick at CL is larceny in NY
Degrees: 1st Deg = more than $1M 2nd Deg = more than $50K 3rd Deg = more than $3K 4th Deg = more than $1K Petit: less than $1K |
|
NY Robbery
|
3rd Deg = forcible stealing
2nd Deg = forcible stealing + 1 of these: 1) D is aided by another who is ACTUALLY present; 2) V is injured; 3) a CAR is stolen (carjacking) 1st Deg = forcible stealing + 1 of these: 1) V is seriously injured 2) D uses or displays a firearm NOTE: affirmative defense- if D can prove the gun was unloaded or inoperable, crime is reduced to 2deg robbery |
|
NY Robbery & Homicide
|
if V killed accidentally: 2nd deg murder (felony murder)
if V killed intentionally: 1st deg murder |
|
Common Law Burglary
|
Breaking and entering the dwelling of another @ night w/ intent to commit a felony inside
Breaking = creating or enlarging an opening by at lst minimal force includes: breaking window, opening window, opening door, constructive breaking= entry gained thru fraud, threat, intimidation doesn't include: climbing thru already open window, entering w/ permission Entry: some part of D's body must enter bldg Dwelling = structure where someone regularly sleeps Of another = can't burglarize own house @ night = look for (sun set, etc) Intent to commit a felony inside = specific intent (to steal, rob, rape, assault, kill, etc) NOTE: many states eliminate the breaking, @ night, & dwelling reqs |
|
NY Burglary
|
3rd Deg: 1) entering or remaining (eliminates concurrence prob, can enter for 1 reason and then stay to steal) in a 2) building 3) unlawfully 4) w. intent to commit ANY crime inside (not just felony)
NOTE: no breaking, dwelling, night reqs 2nd deg: 3rd deg + 1- a) bldg is dwelling; b) non-participant is injured; c) D carries weapon 1st def: D KNOWS he is burglarizing a DWELLING + 1: a) non-participant is injured or 2) D carries weapon |
|
Common Law Arson
|
Malicious burning of a building
State of mind = malice Burning= 1) material wasting (scorching not enough; charring is enough); AND 2) must be the building that is burned (not the carpet) |
|
NY Arson
|
4th Deg = reckless burning of bldg/ motor vehicle
3rd deg = intentional burning of bldg/ MV 2nd deg = 3rd deg + D knows/should've known that someone was inside bldg/ MV 1st deg = 2nd deg + explosive or incendiary device |
|
Common Law possession of contraband
|
contraband = controlled subst, stolen propt, child porn
possession = control for a period of time long enough to have oppt to terminate possession constructive possession = contraband doesn't have to be in D's actual possession, just has to be close enough for him to exercise dominion & control over it mental state: knowledge of both the possession & character of item possessed |
|
NY criminal possession of a weapon
|
gun is loaded AND operable
statutory presumption: gun in a vehicle creates presumption that ALL occupants of vehicle possessed the gun |
|
Common Law Receipt of Stolen Property
|
1. Receiving possession & control of 2. stolen propt
Mental state 1. KNOW that propt was obtained criminally by other party AND 2. with the INTENT to permanently deprive owner of his interest in propt |
|
NY Criminal Possession of Stolen Propt
|
Propt must REALLY BE STOLEN
Propt that is recovered or propt used w/ permission is NOT STOLEN |
|
Accomplice liability
|
accomplice is guilty of all crimes that he aids or encourages AND all other foreseeable crimes committed alone w/ aided crime
|
|
Principal
|
person who commits crime
|
|
accomplice
|
person who helps principal commit the crime.
Requirements 1. Aids or Encourages principal Mental state: intent that crime be committed Not an accomplice when: 1. mere presence @ scene of crime not enough 2. mere knowledge of crime not enough (except NY facilitation) 3. Victims of crime can't be accomplices (minors can't be charged w selling alc to minor) |
|
NY Accomplice
|
Accomplice does not have to have the intent that the crime be committed.
It's enough if the accomplice specifically intends to aid the principal's conduct + has the mental state req for principal's crime (so you can be an accomplice to a negligent or reckless crime) |
|
NY Facilitation
|
mere knowledge of a crime
|
|
Common Law Withdrawal
|
accomplice can avoid crim liability by w/drawing before crime is committed. What he must do depends on how he assisted the principal
1. Encourager: if A "encouraged" P, he may w/draw by REPUDIATING the encouragement b4 the crime is committed 2. Aider: if A helped P, he must either NEUTRALIZE the assistance (take back what he gave as aid) or PREVENT the crime from happening (i.e. call cops) |
|
NY Withdrawal (aka Renunciation)
|
Accomplice must make a SUBSTANTIAL EFFORT to prevent the commission of the crime
1. Renounces crim position 2. withdraws prior to commission of crime 3. makes subst effort to prevent the crime NOTE: Renunciation is an affirmative defense |
|
Common Law Accessory After the Fact
|
1. D HELPS a principal who has committed a felony
2. with KNOWLEDGE that the crime was committed AND 3. with the INTENT to help P avoid arrest or conviction |
|
NY Accessory After the Fact
|
Accessory after the fact is a statutory crime called hindering prosecution
|
|
Inchoate Defenses
|
There are 3 inchoate defenses
1. Solicitation 2. Conspiracy 3. Attempt All 3 Inchoate defenses require specific intent |
|
Solicitation
|
ASKING someone to commit a crime, w/ the INTENT that the crime be committed
Mental State: SI NOTE: the crime is in the asking, it doesn't matter whether the other person agrees or whether the crime is committed |
|
Conspiracy
|
1. Agreement b/w 2+ ppl to commit crime + 2. overt act + 3. in furtherance of the crime
(completion of the crime is unnec) Mental state: specific intent to do 2 things: 1. enter into agreement (conduct that is a concert of action towards common goal) AND 2. to accomplish the objectives of the conspiracy |
|
Overt act
|
Any act, even if preparatory, that is performed by ANY of the co-conspirators
|
|
Bilateral approach
|
At common law, there must be at least 2 guilty minds for there to be a conspiracy. There must be at lst 2 guilty minds, both of whom agree to accomplish the conspiracy's objectives.
If all other parties to the agreement are acquitted, then the last remaining D can't be convicted |
|
Unilateral approach
|
NY/ MPC. D may be guilty of conspiracy even if the other parties are acquitted or were just pretending to agree.
|
|
Wharton Rule
|
if 2 or more ppl are necessary for commission of the substantive offense, there is NO conspiracy unless more parties participate in the agreement than are necessary for the crime
|
|
Vicarious Liability (Pinkerton liability)
|
Aka Pinkerton liability
In add't to conspiracy, D will be liable for other crimes committed by his co-conspirators, if the crimes 1) were committed IN FURTHERANCE of the conspiracy's objective AND 2) were foreseeable NY: NO vicarious liability if D merely conspires and doesn't participate in the crime committed by co-cons |
|
Impossibility defense to conspiracy charge
|
Impossibility is NEVER a defense to conspiracy
|
|
Attempt
|
Attempt requires an overt act beyond mere preparation
Mental state: Attempt, like all inchoate offenses, requires specific intent to commit the underlying crime Can't attempt unintentional crimes, bc you don't intend to do something unintentional. So, there is no attempt to reckless crimes, negligent crimes, or felony murder |
|
Majority/MPC Attempt
|
Substantial Step Test:
Conduct that constitutes a SUBSTANTIAL STEP towards the commission of the crime, provided that the conduct STRONGLY CORROBORATES D's crim purpose |
|
NY/Common Law Attempt
|
Proximity Test
Conduct that gets DANGEROUSLY CLOSE to the commission of the crime to be dangerously close, D must have at least LOCATED V |
|
Factual impossibility (defense to attempt charge)
|
D intends to commit the underlying crime + engages in conduct consistent w/ the intent, but some phys/factual condition unknown to D prevents the underlying crime from taking place.
Factual impossibility is NEVER a defense to attempt (i.e. D sticks hand in V's pocket, but pocket empty) |
|
Legal impossibility (defense to attempt charge)
|
D intends to commit underlying crime + engages in conduct consistent w/ intent, but some legal circumstance or status unknown to D prevents the successful completion of the crime
Common law: legal imposs IS A DEFENSE to attempt NY: legal imposs is NOT A DEFENSE to attempt |
|
Common law Inchoate defense doctrines: withdrawal/renunciation/abandonment
|
Withdrawal is NOT a defense EXCEPT: if D withdraws from CONSPIRACY, he will not be vicariously liable for crimes committed by co-cons AFTER he withdraws
BUT D is still guilty of conspiracy and of all foreseeable crimes committed by co-cons prior to withdrawal |
|
NY/MPC Inchoate defense doctrines: withdrawal/renunciation/abandonment
|
Renunciation is a defense to all 3 inchoate offenses IF:
1. D renounces his crim purpose prior to commission of the substantive offense & makes a sincere & successful effort to prevent commission of the subst offense AND 2. Renunciation is complete and voluntary (not based on fear of failing or being caught) |
|
Merger rule for Inchoate defenses
|
Solicitation & attempt merge with the completed crime
NEW YORK: solicitation does not merge Conspiracy NEVER merges |
|
Insanity
|
D must have a mental disease or defect. 3 tests to determine where the disease renders D legally insane
1. M'Naghten Test (Majority; cognitive): D didn't know conduct was wrong OR D didn't understand nature of his conduct 2. Irresistible Impulse Test (volitional): D unable to control actions OR D unable to conform conduct to the law 3. MPC test (cognitive & volitional): D lacks subs capacity to either 1. appreciate the criminality of his conduct; or 2. conform conduct to law |
|
NY Insanity
|
D must prove he lacked the subst capacity to either 1) understand the nature & consq of his act OR 2) appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct
|
|
Incompetency
|
At time of TRIAL D cannot EITHER
1. understand nature of the proceedings against him; OR 2. assist L in preparation of his defense if either is established, trial is postponed until D regains competency |
|
Common Law Voluntary Intoxication
|
Can only be a defense to specific intent crimes
Never a defense to malice, GI or SL crimes Requires such severe "prostration of the faculties" that D can't form requisite SI |
|
NY Voluntary Intoxication
|
Can be a defense to Intent crimes & Knowledge crimes IF intox prevents D from forming the required state of mind
NEVER defense to crimes of recklessness, negligence, SL |
|
Common Law Infancy
|
Rule of Sevens
1. If @ time of crime, D is LESS THAN 7, prosc not allowed 2. If @ time of crime, D is LESS THAN 14, rebuttable presumption against prosc 3. If @ time of crime D is 14 or older, prosc is allowed |
|
NY Infancy
|
1. If @ time of crime D is under 13, crim prosc as adult not allowed, only juvy deliquent proceedings in Fam Ct
2. If D is 13, crim prosc allowed as adult for 2nd deg murder 3. if D is 14 or 15, crim prosc as adult allowed for serious crimes against ppl or propt 4. If D is 16+, crim prosc allowed for any crime |
|
Common law mistake of fact
|
D's mistake of fact will be a defense depending on the mental state for crime & whether the mistake is reas/unreas
SI: ANY mistake of fact (reas 7 unreas) is a defense Malice/GI: only reas mistake of fact is defense SL: mistake of fact NEVER defense So, a reas mistake of fact is a defense to any crime, except SL and an unreas mistake of fact is only a defense to SI crimes |
|
NY mistake of fact
|
mistake of fact is a defense if it negates the required mental state
For crimes of intent, knowl, recklessness, ANY MoF (even unreas) is defense For crimes of neg, only REAS MoF is defense For SL crimes, MoF NEVER defense |
|
Mistake of Law
|
Mistake of law is generally NOT a defense, EXCEPT if statute specifically makes knowledge of law an element of crime (i.e. selling drugs KNOWING it's unlawful to do so)
|
|
Self-Defense: Non-deadly Force
|
i.e. shove, punch
D may use non-deadly force in self-defense if it is 1. Reas nec to 2. protect against an IMMEDIATE use 3. of unlawful force against D/3rd person |
|
Self-Defense: Deadly Force
|
D may use deadly force in self- defense if he is facing 1. imminent threath of 2. death or serious bod harm
|
|
Initial Aggressor Rule
|
D can't use deadly force if he is the initial aggressor (started the fight)
EXCEPT, D can regain right to use deadly force as self defense IF 1. D withdraws from fight & communicates w/drawal to other person OR 2. V suddenly escalates a nondeadly fight into a deadly one NY: initial aggressor must w/draw before using deadly force in self-D, even if other party suddenly escalated nondeadly fight into deadly one |
|
Retreat Rule
|
Majority: Retreat NOT req before D uses deadly force in self defense
NY/ Minority: Retreated IS REQ, UNLESS- 1. D can't retreat in complete safety OR 2. D is in his home |
|
Mistake as to need for defense of force
|
If mistake as to need for force is reasonable- it's a complete defense
If mistake is unreasonable: NY: no defense MPC/Minority: mitigates but not exonerate (i.e. Imperfect Self Defense- unreas belief in need to use deadly force in self-D will mitigate murder to vol mansl) |
|
Use of force to prevent a crime
|
Nondeadly: can use if reas nec to prevent any serious breach of peace
Deadly: can use to prevent a FELONY RISKING HUMAN LIFE |
|
defense of others
|
D may use force and deadly force to protect others just as he could use to defend himself
|
|
Defense of property
|
General rule: deadly force CANNOT be used to defend propt
EXCEPT: D can use deadl force INSIDE HER DWELLING when 1) intruder fained entry in a TUMULTUOUS MANNER and 2) occupant reas believes the use of deadly force is nec to prevent a PERSONAL ATTACK on herself or some1 else in dwelling |
|
Resisting arrest
|
Majority: IF arrest is unlawful, D may use nondeadly force to resist the arresting officer
NY: Force CANOT be used to resist arrest, even unlawful arrest, UNLESS arresting officer uses excessive force |
|
Use of deadly force by law enforcement
|
Officer may use deadly force only if doing so is reasonable under the circ
|
|
Necessity
|
Necessity is a defense to crim conduct if D reas believes the conduct was necessary to prevent a greater harm
LIMITATIONS: necessity defense is unavail if: 1. D causes death of another to protect propt OR 2. D is at fault in creating the situation |
|
Duress
|
Duress is a defense if D was COERCED to commit crime bc of threat FROM ANOTHER PERSON of imminent death or serious bodily injury to D or close fam member
LIMITATION: Duress NEVER DEFENSE TO HOMICIDE (except NY- can be defense to homicide) |
|
Entrapment
|
If gov't unfairly tempts D to commit crime, D can claim entrapment IF
1. the crim design originates w gov't AND 2. D NOT PREDISPOSED TO COMMIT THE CRIME |