Crim Law Test Outline
Criminal Law and Its Processes: Cases and Materials 6th Edition
Kadish and Schulhoffer
Punishment Theories
Retribution
1) Payback
2) Focus on the nature of crime
3) Moral desert
Deterrance
1) Outweighing the joy of crime
2) Sacrificial lamb is o.k.
Reform/Rehabilitation
1) 2 Protect soc. by prevention
2) Focus on the criminal
3) Look 4 alternatives 2 prison; treatment, boot camp, home detention
Incapacitation
1) Isolate criminals
2) Looking @ past records but false positives R 2/3
Fair Punishment & the Legality Principle
Robinson v. CA (Bing an addict is crime in CA)
1) Legislative Intent
2) Selective target
1. Unfair inherently
2. Violate fair notice
3. Leg. has obligation 2 narrow the field by Due
Process Clause
& 14th Amend.
3) Predisposition isnt enough 4 crime
4) Holdings
1. Due Process Clause forbids this
2. Cruel & Unusual punishment
3. Being an addict doesnt constitute a crime
Keeler v. Superior Ct. (D stomped fetus from his estranged wife)
1) Legality Principle--pwr 2 create crimes lies w/leg.
not w/the cts
2) Due Process of Const.
1. Fair play/notice
2. Foreseeability
3) Ex Post Facto Law of Const.
4) Look @ leg. intent through
1. Plain meaning
2. Statutory construction
3. Case law & Ded circs
The Elements of Just Punishment
Actus Reus/Culpable Conduct
1) Positive/Voluntary Axns
1. Elements of the offense in the statute
2. Vol. guilty act
3. Jury Instr. is the law of the case
4. Defenses
(1) Nonvol. axns
(2) But if knew susceptible & could prevent, no defense
2) Omissions in Good Samaritan Laws
1. Four standard sits reqing duty of care
(1) Statute
(2) Status--parent, spouse
(3) Contractual
(4) Volly assume & prevent others from helping
2. Pope Case
(1) If U see someone else cause, do nothing, & causing it
2 get worse--omission prohibited by statute
(2) Misprision--failure 2 prevent a commision of a felony
Mens Rea/Culpable Mental States
1) Intro Cases
1. Regina v. Cunningham ( gas leak)--need S/M
2. Regina v. Falkner (rum, ship blown up)--need awareness,
intent, foreseeability
2) Levels of Intent
1. Purposefully--specific; conscious objective 2 cause the result
against the law; some defenses here like vol. intox, mental
disorder
2. Knowingly--general; aware result will B practically certain
3. Recklessly--Conscious disregard of substantial & unjustifiable
risk where risk=gross deviation from stand. of cond. of law
abiding person
4. Negligence--should B aware of substantial & unjustifiable
risk=gross deviation from rsbl persons stand. of care;
Santillanes v. NM where must apply CRIMINAL negligence
5. Jewels Willful Blindness Instr./9th Circuits
Actual Knowledge
(1) Knowing incls Ds awareness of high % &
(2) Deliberately avoided truth
(3) But if D actually believed it was otherwise, / was just
careless, then have defenses
3) Mistake of Fact
1. People v. Olson--no rsbl mistake defense b/c of strict liability
mens rea
2. US v. Staples--rsbl mistake defense 4 unregistered firearm
b/c not strict liability mens rea
3. If ignorance/mistake negates S/M element of the offense
(other than strict liability element)
(1) Mistake was honest belief
(2) Most states req. rsbl belief: MPC doesn't
4. Cts guidance 4 rsnings
(1) Statutes lang.
(2) Precedents
(3) Public Policy
(4) Statutory Scheme
4) Strict Liability
1. Element that reqs mens rea becomes a non-issue b/c doesnt
need mens rea proof
2. Public Policy 2 protect soc. harm which is deemed greater
than indivs freedom
3. Never explicit in statutes
4. Maj. View--no defense regardless of inquiry
5. Min. view--a duty of rsbl inquiry, then defense
6. Pub. welfare/regulatory offenses
(1) D is always on notice
(2) Less penalty/stigma attached 2 the crimes
5) Mistake of Law
1. Malum in se--C/L crime, mens rea req., D likely 2 know, high
stigma & punish.
2. Malum prohibitum--regulatory offense, strict liability, D not
know, low stigma & punish.
3. People v. Marrero--own interp. isn't enough 4 reg. offense
4. C/L--ignorance is not excuse b/c of policy justification 4 reg.
offenses
5. Modern Exceptions
(1) Law must B pub.'ed 4 due process
(2) If U have an interp. from someone of auth.
Theft Related Offenses
Burglary
1) Elements of C/L
1. Breaking & entering
2. Of the dwelling of another
3. At nt.
4. W/intent 2 commit felony inside
5. Not always theft
2) Modern
1. Can B @ day X
2. Any inhabited place
3. W/O permission instead of break-in
Larceny
1) Elements of C/L
1. Trespassory
2. Taking & carrying away of
3. Personaly property of another
4. W/intent 2 steal
5. Reqs theft
2) Fed. larceny statutes like bank
Robbery
1) Elements of C/L
1. Larceny reqt plus
2. Property taken from person w/presence of V
3. By means of force/fear
4. Reqs thefts
2) People v. Mungia--force must B more than the taking
Consolidation of Crimes
1) CA Penal Code 1089--larceny, embezzlement, & false pretenses
2) Less cheating