Busy. Please wait.
or

show password
Forgot Password?

Don't have an account?  Sign up 
or

Username is available taken
show password

why


Make sure to remember your password. If you forget it there is no way for StudyStack to send you a reset link. You would need to create a new account.
We do not share your email address with others. It is only used to allow you to reset your password. For details read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.


Already a StudyStack user? Log In

Reset Password
Enter the associated with your account, and we'll email you a link to reset your password.

Remove Ads
Don't know
Know
remaining cards
Save
0:01
To flip the current card, click it or press the Spacebar key.  To move the current card to one of the three colored boxes, click on the box.  You may also press the UP ARROW key to move the card to the "Know" box, the DOWN ARROW key to move the card to the "Don't know" box, or the RIGHT ARROW key to move the card to the Remaining box.  You may also click on the card displayed in any of the three boxes to bring that card back to the center.

Pass complete!

"Know" box contains:
Time elapsed:
Retries:
restart all cards




share
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.

  Normal Size     Small Size show me how

Criminal Law

QuestionAnswer
malum in se the act is wrong even if its not a crime or law
malum prohibita the act is wrong by law
actus reus The guilty act committed by the D
mens rea The guilty state of mind of D
Strict Liability Crimes without a mens rea
General Intent D committed the act to serve as the actus reus
Specific Intent D committed the act to serve as the actus reus and another intended reason
Concurrence When the actus reus and mens rea exist at the same time
Concurrence CANNOT occur when the mens rea is... -Formed after the actus reus -Formed but abandoned before the actus reus -Formed but not related to the actus reus
Causation The connection between the act and result
Homicide The killing of another human with malice
First Degree Murder An intentional murder that is premeditated with an ITK
Second Degree Murder An intentional murder that is unpremeditated but has an ITK or cause SBH
Second Degree Murder: Depraved Heart An unintentional killing where the risk is so high that the argument by D is irrelevant
Voluntary Manslaughter An intentional killing committed in the Heat of Passion that has the ITK or cause SBH
Heat of Passion Requirements -Objective provocation -No "cooling off" period -Is an imperfect defense and intent can be transferred
No Crime: Defense Killing The person is not convicted for killing someone because they acted out of insanity or self-defense/defense of others
First Degree Felony Murder An unintentional OR intentional killing that occurs while committing another crime
Felony Murder can only be applied during what crimes? Burglary Arson Robbery Kidnapping Attempt (at committing one of these crimes) Rape
Involuntary/Misdemeanor Manslaughter An unintentional killing that was caused by recklessness and an unlawful act
Involuntary Manslaughter: Unlawful Act A death that is caused by an act that is NOT inherently dangerous
No Crime but Tort An unintentional murder that occurs from negligence and taking an unreasonable risk
No Crime or Tort An unintentional murder that occurred from a reasonable risk i.e. driving slow in the rain but hitting another car
Battery An intentional act that is unpermitted and causes a harmful/offensive contact with another person
Common Law Types of Battery Basic Battery and Reckless Battery
Reckless Battery When the battery is a reckless act and there is no intent
Assault Like attempted battery that creates a reasonable fear to the party but never reached battery
MPC: Aggravated Assault Extreme indifference to the value of life
C/L: "Intent to Frighten" Assault Has the major specific intent to cause apprehension of immanent bodily harm
Attempt When the D engages in sufficient acts with the intent to commit the target crime, but the crime was not completed. If it was than it merges into the target crime.
MPC: Attempt -Meant to identify manifestly dangerous people and focuses on the substantial step test -Abandonment is a defense and the punishment is slightly less severe than the target crime except in murder cases
Abandonment When the actus reus and mens rea are present and there is a complete renunciation of purpose and the D must stop the crime from occurring
C/L: Attempt -Meant to prevent immanent social harm and focuses on the dangerously proximate test -Uses legal impossibility as a defense and the punishment is slightly less severe than the target crime
Types of Impossibility Legal and Factual
Legal Impossibility A defense under the C/L when there is a real intent to commit the crime but there is a serious mistake and the crime is permanently impossible to commit
Factual Impossibility Not a defense but it is when a party tries to commit a crime but there is a minor mistake that makes it temporarily impossible
C/L Sufficient Act Tests Last Act Test Dangerously Proximate Indispensable Element Probable Desistance Equivocality Substantial Step (ONLY IN MPC)
Last Act Test D did everything they believe is necessary to commit the target crime
Dangerous Proximity Test Looks at what D has done and how close he is to completing the target crime
Indispensable Element Test Helps decide dangerous proximity and looks at what remains to be done by D in order to commit the target crime
Probable Desistance Test Looks at whether D reached a point where it was unlikely he would abandon his efforts toward the target crime
Equivocality Test Looks at whether D's actions have the specific intent to achieve the target crime
Substantial Step Test ONLY IN MPC: where D's acts are a step toward the commission of the target crime
C/L: Burglary Breaking and entering into a dwelling house of another at night with the intent to commit a felony therein
MPC: Burglary The unlawful entry into a dwelling of another with the intent to commit a felony therein
Conspiracy A combination of two or more people who form a purpose of committing an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means. Impossibility is NEVER a defense!
Steps to Conspiracy Solicitation of another Conspiracy to commit crime Attempt to commit crime Target Crime
MPC: Conspiracy An agreement and overt act is required and there is a specific intent between at least one party to commit the crime. Allows withdrawal or abandonment but the punishment is equal to committing the actual crime.
C/L: Conspiracy An agreement between at least two guilty minds who have the specific intent to commit the target crime but are able to withdrawal and only be guilty of everything prior to it but if the crime is met then the punishment is less than the target crime
Plurality Rules in Conspiracy Gebardi Rule Wharton Rule Fox Rule
Doctrine of Evil/Powell Rule When someone commits a crime but is unaware i.e. the guy asking a friend to get "his car"
Withdrawal Defense in both MPC and C/L of conspiracy but when it occurs they are guilty of everything that happened prior to this
Abandonment A defense under MPC for conspiracy where a person has a change of heart and decides not to commit act but they must stop it from occurring
Gebardi Rule Applicable under C/L and MPC its when a person is considered a victim, they cannot be a participant of conspiracy even if there was consent
Fox Rule In C/L only, if all the conspirators except one are acquitted, you cannot convict the one because there needs to be two guilty minds
Wharton Rule A person can be convicted of conspiracy and the crime they were trying to commit because certain crimes require two guilty minds
Accessory before the Fact Agreement with others in support but not at the crime
Accessory after the Fact Guilty of obstruction but no knowledge of the crime
Larceny/Theft Based on possession NOT ownership and in C/L it is larceny and MPC is theft
C/L: Larceny The taking and carrying away of personal property of another with intent to steal
C/L Larceny Crimes Larceny, Larceny by trick, Embezzlement, Obtained by false pretenses
Larceny by Trick A C/L crime where consent is missing because a party was tricked into it
Embezzlement-breach of trust A C/L crime of taking something that wasn't yours but was in your possession i.e. rental car
MPC: Theft Intentionally exerting unauthorized control over property of another with intent to deprive
C/L: Robbery Larceny (now theft) from the victim's person or presence by force or intimidation
MPC: Robbery Committing a theft and inflicting serious bodily harm to another or threatening another with or purposefully putting in fear of immediate serious injury when armed by force
Affirmative Defenses Prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the D is guilty of each element of a crime
Self-Defense Approach Tests MPC: Subjective Test C/L: Objective Test
C/L: Self Defense The D must act with a reasonable belief of imminent attack on her person; attacking force is unlawful may defend with reasonably necessary force
"Imperfect Defense" Theory defenses that work towards one type of crime but won't work for lesser crime
Retreat/Castle Rule A minority position of self-defense where one may not use deadly force as defense if there is a safe avenue to go to without increasing danger to self
Battered Spouse Syndrome A self defense claim under the C/L ONLY
British C/L: Defense of Others Derivative Theory Deriving someone's defense rights and acting to protect them on their behalf if you see them being attacked
American Traditional: Defense of Others Primary Theory You do not need to derive the rights to defend the other person because it is an assumed obligation to protect the party and rights of defense of a person don't need to be given
Defense of Property/Dwelling -Reasonable force to protect mere property -CANNOT use deadly devices when not in dwelling -Protecting of family and self
Defense of Necessity/Choice of Evils An objective test where the situations are beyond the D where he must choose between 2 evils in which he believes to be necessary to avoid a harm or evil to himself or one of the other 2 situations
MPC Defense of Duress An immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury that creates a well-founded fear that the threat will be carried out and there's no reasonable opportunity to escape the threat but D may have to tell authorities later
C/L: Arson The malicious burning of a dwelling house of another
MPC: Arson The highly malicious burning (beyond char) of a dwelling of another
Mental Disease/Defect When a person lacks the mental capacity to know criminality from wrongfulness
Insanity Defense Tests(RARE) -M'Naughten (Right-Wrong) Test -Parsons (Irresistible Impulse)Test -Durham (Product) Test -Substantial Capacity Test -Insanity Defense Reform Act (current)
M'Naughten (Right-Wrong) Test A test for insanity where the accused party had a mental defect and was not able to know right from wrong
Parsons (Irresistible Impulse) Test An insanity test that combines with M'Naughten where the accused is not responsible for the action because he was unable to choose right from wrong because of duress or mental disease and is unable to prevent it
Durham (Product) Test An insanity test where the accused is not criminally responsible because his act was caused by his mental disease or defect
ALI-MPC-Substantial Capacity Test An insanity test that combines M'Naughten and Parsons
The Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 An insanity test that D committed the offense as a result of mental disease/defect and was unable to know the nature and quality of wrongfulness
Omissions When D has a pre-existing legal duty to act but doesn't
C/L: Omission A person CANNOT be charged with a crime of omission if they had a legal or moral duty
Omission actus reus must have: -D having a pre-existing legal duty to act -Capacity to act -Failure to act
C/L: Juvenile System There is no separate system for juveniles and a person becomes an adult at 14 yrs.
MPC: Juvenile System Ages vary by the state but at 18 you become an adult but 14-18 yrs. is able to be tried in juvenile or adult court
Voluntary Intoxication Not an affirmative defense because D made a choice to ingest something and purposefully did it
Involuntary Intoxication Can be used as a defense because D was unaware of being intoxicated
Types of Involuntary Intoxication Coerced, Pathological, Innocent Mistake, Medically Prescribed
Coerced Involuntary Intoxication Person drinks because they are forced by reason of duress or coercion
Pathological Involuntary Intoxication The intoxication is unexpected because it was a result of a powerful medication or alcohol that was unknown to induce intoxication
Innocent Mistake Involuntary Intoxication When someone is tricked into the intoxication such as consuming a drink from a spiked punch bowl
C/L: Rape The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will
MPC: Rape The sexual intercourse by force or threat of force against the will of the victim
Statutory Rape A form of rape under the MPC where consent of females under a certain age is irrelevant because they are not of age to consent
Created by: jmarti13