Criminal Law 1- 4

Incapacitation/ Restraint

restraining or executing criminals so they cannot commit crimes in the future.
Purpose:To protect the public from harm

Specific deterrence

punishing a criminal to deter that person from committing future crimes
Purpose: Imprisonment teaches offenders

General deterrence

punish a criminal to deter others not to commit crimes
Purpose:The threat of incarceration to society prevents people from committing crime

Rehabilitation

forcing a criminal to undergo some form of social education or reconditioning to prevent future crimes
Purpose: force a person to obtain the skills to be a productive human being upon re-entry into society

Retribution

Vindicating a wrong; For Society
Purpose: to lessen the desire for private retribution by the victim or others seeking revenge for the criminal's wrong doing

Desired outcome of Criminal Law

Rehabilitation; aid offenders in becoming law abiding and productive members of society through: education, counseling, restitution, community service

Sources of Criminal Law

Common Law, Statutory Law, Model Penal Code

Common Law

Precedent, stare decisis

Stare Decisis

To stand by that which is decided

Statutory Law

20th century law that has largely supplemented or replaced the common law

Model Penal Code

A suggested guide for enactment and interpretation of criminal law; not necessarily the law unless adopted and enacted by legislature

Legislative intent

The purpose the legislators enacted a particular statute, common law must yield to the clear language of statutes, courts must resolve conflict between legislative intent and statutory wording

Bills of Attainder

Law cannot bypass the courts to convict an individual by legislative pronouncement.

Ex Post Facto Law

laws that retroactively make innocent conduct illegal, increase the punishment for a criminal act, or decrease the standard of proof required for a conviction

Burden of Proof

prosecutor bears the burden of proof-Defendant is presumed innocent-The act of Presenting evidence to a finder of fact, whether judge or jury, who weigh the facts and determine guilt

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt

The standard of proof in criminal cases- Proof that excludes every reasonable hypothesis except guilt; proof that excludes every reasonable possibility of innocence; or proof to a moral certainty- highest standard of proof

Corpus Delicti

the body of the crime"- The fact that a crime has been committed.

Prima facie proof

Proof that makes it plausible that defendant committed the act

Presumptions

Facts that must be inferred (presumed) on the basis of facts that have been already proven

Reasonable inferences

are permissable- Possible conclusions that may be drawn if certain predicate facts are proven
example: that all persons intend the reasonable and logical consequences of their actions

Ultimate issue

The question of whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the crime- usually turns on the subordinate issues

Affirmative defense

burden of proof shifts to defendant- defendant admits committing the acts charged, but seeks to justify or excuse his/her conduct by establishing additional facts. (Lesser of two evils defense)

Directed verdict

prosecution, as a matter of law, has failed to present enough evidence to satisfy the elements of an offense, the judge doesn't submit the case to a jury by the entry of a directed verdict of acquittal- There can never be a directed verdict of guilt.

Physical act of a crime

a deliberate body movement or the omission or failure to act when the law imposes a duty to do so.
Examples: evil thought, express thought, request, agreement, agreement, attempt, consummation

Evil thought

Not a crime- a purely mental decision to commit a crime

Express thought

verbalization of an evil thought to another- usually not a crime- one exception is perjury

Request

when one asks another to join in a criminal plan- the crime of solicitation is complete when the request is made

Agreement

when two or more persons agree that they will jointly commit a crime - sufficient for the crime of conspiracy in some jurisdictions

Attempt

often requires an overt act for an attempted crime, a substantial step toward the commission of the crime - Mere preparation is not enough

Consummation

when one commits all the physical acts required of the crime

Mental states of a crime

Intentional, willful, wanton, reckless, strict liability

Intentionally

A person consciously intends to cause a specific result or to engage in a specific conduct

Willfully (Knowingly)

A person is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that the circumstance exists. example: Little Juan

Wantonly

A person is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. example: "I just wanted to scare them", DUI Assault (The reasonable person would have known what the result wa

Recklessly

A person fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. example: drunk buddy stabbed other in the butt and he died

Strict liability

where the persons state of mind is irrelevant. Crimes created by statute. example: dog bite

Factual cause

but for" test of causation - unconcerned with moral fault, first link in the chain of events to result - does not determine whether to punish or not

Legal cause

Focus is on defendant's fault as determined by society - legal cause and factual cause are required for conviction

Essential elements of a crime

Mens Rea, Actus Reus, and social harm MUST HAVE ALL THREE FOR A CRIME

Mens Rea

Mental state of mind or Intent

Actus Reus

Physical Act

Social Harm

harm to all of society rather than harm to one individual, created by statute or prior cases

Crimes Mala in Se

inherently evil crime

Crimes mala prohibita

Crimes that only exist because of a statute of regulation. example: traffic laws

Crimes classified by Mens Rea

Crimes Mala in Se, Crimes Mala Prohibita, Specific Intent, Scienter (knowing) Offense, General Intent, Strict Liability (focus only on physical act)

Crimes classified by Harm

Crimes against Persons (murder, robbery, rape), Crimes Against habitation (burglary), Crimes against property (larceny), Crimes against public order (disorderly conduct)

Assault (Example of classification by Harm)

The stone missed A

Battery (Example of classification by Harm)

The stone struck A's shoulder

Mayhem (Example of classification by Harm)

The stone put A's eye out

Murder (Example of classification by Harm)

The stone killed A

Statutory Law elements of Burglary

Actus Rea: to unlawfully enter or remain in
Social Harm: the dwelling of another with the Mens Rea: intent to commit a crime
anytime day or night

Statutory Law elements of Larceny

Actus Reus: taking or exercising control over
Social Harm: personal property of another
Mens Rea: with the intent to permanently deprive

1st degree Murder

Mens Rea- Intent to kill

2nd degree Murder/ Voluntary Manslaughter

Mens Rea- Intent to cause serious injury

Manslaughter / Involuntary manslaughter

Mens Rea- Intent to inflict a minor wound

Reckless homicide / Involuntary manslaughter

Mens Rea- No intent to cause injury

Aiders and Abettors

Principals in the second degree, complicitors

Accessories before the fact

solicits, counsels, or advises another on how to commit crime at a later date

Trigger-man

in execution is not appropriate punishment for an accomplice in a death penalty case

Perpetrator

Principal in the first degree, one who performs the physical acts that constitute a crime or commits the crime by use of an instrumentality

Instrumentality

use of an inanimate object, animal, or innocent human being to commit a crime

Accessories after the fact

one who impedes the apprehension, trial, or punishment of a felon

To convict as Accessory after the fact must prove

-felony was committed
-defendant knew that the underlying felony was committed
-defendant intended to hinder apprehension, trial, or punishment
-defendant assisted the felon after the fact to avoid apprehension, trial, or punishment

Misprision of a felony

party who conceal or fail to report a crime

Conspiracy

a meeting of the minds plus intent, two or more people, one actor must commit an overt act in furtherance of the agreement, no direct contact needed between all co-conspirators, but must have a common contact(hub)

Types of conspiracies

wheel conspiracy- center of wheel is one person (hub) other people are spokes
chain conspiracy- parties linked together in linear fashion (example: drug organization)

Criminal solicitation

inviting or requesting another to commit a crime; solicitor must specifically intend that the other does the act.

Merger

one crime merges into another greater offense, defendant can only be guilty of one of the offenses not both.

Renunciation Defense

for Criminal solicitation or conspiracy-crime was not committed, it is a defense that you voluntarily prevented the crime from occurring. example: Shrek and Puss in boots

Last Proximate Act Test

defendant is guilty of an attempt after doing all that they think is necessary to complete the intended crime

Dangerous Proximate Test

Temporal and geographical nearness of the prohibited harm, seriousness of the harm, degree of apprehension created

Mere Preparation

portion of an attempted crime prior to the point at which consummation of the offense begins

Liability- Ignorance or mistake

A persons ignorance of the law doesn't effect their liability- KRS 501.070

Defenses to attempts

Factual (example: gun wasn't loaded, but defendant didn't know that)
Legal (example: statutory rape when law is age 16 and the victim is 17)
Abandonment and renunciation (example: defendant's discontinuance of a plan to commit a crime and notification of

Alibi

case-in-chief defense that claims the defendant was not in a position to commit the crime charged

SODDI" defense

Some other dummy did it - defense commonly used by defendants

Case-In-Chief defense

burden of proof is the prosecutors-defense that use mistake as a defense and challenge the prosecution's version of the facts, but do not introduce an independent legal claim into the case. Defense that denies some or all of the evidence.
example: someone

Duress

affirmative defense that you committed a crime to avoid imminent and serious harm - May not be used in Murder cases

Compulsion and Necessity

affirmative defense that threat of imminent harm, only way to prevent the threatened harm was to violate the law, and the harm caused by the violation is less serious than the harm defendant sought to avoid.
example: hurricane Katrina victims who stole fo

Mistake of Fact

MAY be a defense but must negate a material element of the offense
example: knowledge or intent

Mistake of Law

May be a defense if it negates the Mens Rea required for the crime

Voluntary Intoxication

case-in-chief defense-not a defense to wanton or willful conduct in some jurisdictions- Kentucky is one of them

Involuntary Intoxication

case-in-chief or affirmative defense-may be a defense if the substance provided produced a mental condition comparable to insanity -Defendant must prove they had no knowledge of ingesting the substance- Culpability may still exist for wanton or willful co

M'Naghten Test

legal test used to distinguish if defendant knows right from wrong-when attempting to use insanity as a defense- Kentucky uses this test

Irresistible Impulse Test

legal test used to distinguish if defendant acted from an uncontrollable impulse

Diminished Capacity Test

recognizes that defendants may lack "Substantial" but not total mental capacity

Federal Test

uses the M'Naghten "right-from-wrong" standard, but requires the defendant to prove insanity by clear and convincing evidence- highest standard of proof required

Guilty but Mentally Ill

prime distinction between the verdicts is the post-trial handling of the defendant. (do they go to hospital then jail or straight to jail)

Justifiable Use of Force

affirmative defense - depends on jurisdiction as to who is required to prove or disprove

Self-Defense

amount of defensive force used must be REASONABLE, defendant was not the aggressor, perceived immediate threat of bodily harm and force was necessary to avoid harm

Retreat

an avenue of safe escape, a prerequisite to self-defense in some jurisdictions

Defense of others

the act of protecting another from harm, which may excuse or justify the defendant's use of force

Entrapment

affirmative defense that focuses on whether the defendant was induced to commit the crime by the government agent, and whether the defendant would have committed the offense without the inducement.

Competency to stand trial

defendant must be rational, possess the ability to testify coherently, and be able to meaningfully discuss the case with defense counsel.

Insanity

case-in-chief or affirmative defense- prosecution may be required to prove sanity, or defendant may be given burden to prove insanity- issue of insanity can arise at different stages of criminal proceedings.

battered person syndrome

mandatory defense if prior acts or acts of domestic violence and abuse are present

criminal homicide

taking another's life in a manner prescribed by law; a killing in the absence of justification or excuse

jury nullification

law says one thing; jury says another

protection of another

subjective defense

extreme emotional disturbance

subjective defense

standards of proof

guilt by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not), prima facie, clear and convincing, strict liability

Case in chief defense examples

state (prosecutor has burden of proof), alibi, mistake of fact or law, involuntary intoxication, self-defense

Affirmative defense examples

insanity, self defense, extreme emotional disturbance,entrapment, duress, necessity, defense of others, defense of property, defense of habitation

Kentucky Mental states of mind

intentionally, wantonly, recklessly, strict liability

Common Law Murder

killing another person with "malice afterthought

First degree Murder

strict liability, intentional, requires premeditation

Second degree Murder

non premeditated, intent to kill is not required if another malicious intent is present, wanton or reckless state of mind, intent to inflict serious harm

Manslaughter

key distinction from Murder is the absence of Malice

Common law Assault and Battery

two separate offenses battery or assault, not a single offense

Mayhem

common law crime where victim was dismembered or disfigured. example: Lorena Bobbitt

Malicious Wounding

common law crime of shooting, stabbing, cutting, or wounding any person with the intent to maim, disfigure, disable, or kill

Common Law Rape

sexual intercourse with a woman other than the defendant's wife by force and without the victim's consent

Statutory Rape Law

sexual intercourse with another person by use of forcible compulsion

Justifiable use of force

preponderance of the evidence is burden of proof standard

Federal test

only place that burden of proof is place on defendant for clear and convincing evidence