This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Law Outlines Criminal Law Outlines

Mens Rea Mpc Framework Outline

Updated Mens Rea Mpc Framework Notes

Criminal Law Outlines

Criminal Law

Approximately 94 pages

Criminal Law with Professor Rachel Barkow at NYU School of Law.

This is a synthesis of all topics in a fall 2019 class, Criminal Law at NYU School of Law. My notes consist of the important elements of each doctrine, the unsettled areas, and policy justifications....

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Criminal Law Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Mens Rea: The MPC Framework

Mens Rea Framework

  • MPC 2.02 > focus on subjective blameworthiness (retributive concerns)

    • Divides statute into material elements

      • Conduct (verb)

      • Attendant circumstances

      • Result (consequence)

    • 2.01(2) - four levels of culpability

    • 2.01(2)(a) - purposely (with intent)

      • It is D's conscious object to engage in the conduct or create the result; awareness that the attendant circumstances exist or believe or hope they exist

    • 2.01(2)(b) - knowingly (willful = knowingly 2.02(8))

      • D is aware that it is practically certain that conduct will cause result, aware of the nature of the conduct and aware that the attendant circumstances exist

      • Includes willful blindness

    • 2.01(2)(c) - recklessly (maliciously)

      • D consciously disregards a substantial (subjective) and unjustifiable (objective) risk that he is engaging in this conduct, that the attendant circumstances exist, or that conduct will lead to result

      • Risk must be of a nature/degree that its disregard is a gross deviation from the standard of conduct of reasonable actor in the same circumstances (subjective awareness standard)

    • 2.01(2)(d) - negligently (criminal negligence)

      • D should have known of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that he is engaging in this conduct, that the attendant circumstances exist, or that conduct will lead to result

      • Risk must be of a nature/degree that failure to perceive is a gross deviation from the standard of conduct of reasonable actor in the same circumstances (reasonable person/objective standard/criminal negligence standard)

  • When MR is unclear -

    • 2.02(3) default rule: If statute is silent on MR or MR doesn't apply to an element, apply default of recklessly (unless SL)

    • 2.02(4) default rule: MR term applies to all material terms

      • Exception 1: statute distinguishes between the material terms (the MR term does not travel through)

        • Look at sentence structure, grammar, conjunctions, punctuation, legislative history/intent

          • Ex. Commas breaking up, two independent clauses > not travel

          • Ex. Commas breaking up a continuous sentence > travel

          • Ex. Adverb only modifies verbs not nouns > not travel

      • Exception 2: a contrary purpose plainly appears

        • if made to look like purposefully separate element (set off by commas, etc.)

        • if MR term not mentioned in beginning of statute but next to a later element

        • OR contrary purpose in another part of the statute (ex. Olson: mistake about age has a negligent mens rea elsewhere in the statute)

        • Some argue that contrary purpose can include legislative...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Criminal Law Outlines.