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

Law Outlines Criminal Law Outlines

Mens Rea Outline

Updated Mens Rea Notes

Criminal Law Outlines

Criminal Law

Approximately 43 pages

Fairly comprehensive. Includes charts with differences between MPC, Common Law and New York...

Available here

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:

  1. Mens Rea

    1. Nature of Mens Rea

      1. United States v. Cordoba-Hincapie

        1. Generally, a “guilty mind.” Acting with a general purpose

      2. Regina v. Cunningham

        1. Appellant had removed a gas meter from a basement, but had failed to disengage the gas pipe, endangering the life of an older woman who lived in the house.

        2. Lower court instructed the jury that “malicious” merely meant acting wickedly.

        3. Appellate judge disagreed, ruling that malicious must mean, in the absence of specific intent, the knowledge of the likely consequences of one's actions

    2. Culpability

      1. Intent

        1. People v. Conley

          1. Defendant had meant to hit one individual with a wine bottle, but ended up hitting and injuring another.

          2. Defendant argues that the statute requires an intent to cause the specific injuries set forth in the statute.

          3. Court finds that the state need not prove that the defendant intended to cause the specific injuries, but may rely on the likely consequences of one's actions.

        2. General (3 uses of each)

          1. Only wickedness is required

          2. Recklessness or Negligence

          3. A mens rea that only relates to the actus reus (common law)

        3. Specific (3 uses of each)

          1. Specific elements of a crime

          2. The mens rea defined in the statute

          3. Common law

            1. The intention to commit some future act (with intent to sell)

Comparison of NYPL, MPC and Common Law Approaches to Culpability
NYPL MPC Common Law

1. Intentional – A person acts intentionally with respect to a result or to conduct described by a statue defining an offense when his conscious objective is to cause such result or to engage in such conduct.

2. Knowledge – A person acts knowingly with respect to conduct or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he is aware that his conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist.

3. Recklessness - A person acts recklessly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that such result will occur or that such circumstance exists. The Risk must be of such nature and degree that disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. A person who creates such a risk but is unaware thereof solely by reason of voluntary intoxication also acts recklessly with respect thereto.

4. Negligence - A person acts with criminal negligence with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that such result will occur or that such circumstance exists. THe risk must be of such nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

1. Purposely – A person acts purposely with respect to a material element of an offense when:

(i) if the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and

(ii) if the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist.

2. Knowledge –A person acts knowingly with respect to a material she:

(i) if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist; and

(ii) if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.

3. Recklessness – A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the actor's situation.

4. Negligence – A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result form his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and purpose of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

1. General Intent - A mens rea that only relates to the actus reus

2. Specific Intent -

a. The intention to commit some future act (with intent to sell)

b. Special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (with the intent to cause humilation)

c. Proof of the actor's awareness of a situation (known to be under the age of 18 years.)

  1. Special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus (with the intent to cause humiliation)

  2. Proof of the actor's awareness of a situation (known to be under the age of 18 years.)

  1. Transferred Intent (pg. 156 note 4 of People v. Conley)

    1. A legal fiction designed to reach a just result.

    2. As in Conley, an individual's intent to cause harm to one person may be “transferred” to another if the harm did not come to the intended individual.

  3. Willful Blindness and the “Knowledge” of Attendant Circumstances

    1. State v. Nations

      1. Police entered a strip club and noticed an underage girl “dancing” for “tips.”

      2. When questioned, the proprietor lied about her efforts to uncover the girl's age.

      3. The statute states that “knowingly” is a necessary component of endangering the welfare of a child. Therefore, the proprietor can at most be said to have acted recklessly

    2. NYPL and MPC approaches

...

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

More Criminal Law Samples