Law Outlines Criminal Law Outlines
This outline covers a criminal law course taught by John C. Jeffries, co-author of the University Casebook Series textbook on Criminal Law. The outline details a wide range of topics within criminal law including common law and MPC treatment of mens rea and actus rea, theoretical principles behind crime and punishment, and the the laws of attempt, conspiracy/complicity, RICO, sexual offenses, justification and excuse, and the insanity defense. Each of the two contributed to this outline received ...
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:
Criminal Law – University of Virginia School of Law
The Criminal Act – Actus Reus
Material Elements of Actus Reus
Conduct
Acts or omissions required to complete the offense
Directly controlled by actor
Circumstances
External facts that must be in existence for a crime to be committed
Outside actor’s control besides mere presence there
Result
Consequences of conduct incorporated in the definition of the offense
Not always specified by statute
Voluntary Act Doctrine
Martin v. State (p. 68)
Facts: Martin was arrested while drunk in his home, and then involuntarily and forcibly taken to a public place by the arresting officer and tried of public intoxication
Rule: For the crime of public intoxication, both the intoxication and the presence in public must be voluntary
General Rule: every actus reus defined within the crime must be voluntary
Types of Involuntary Acts (p. 69-70)
Physically Coerced Movement
If someone takes your fist and hits someone else with it, you’re not liable
Reflex Movements
If someone acts upon you in such a way that you reflexively act, you are not liable (scaring you, hitting your kneecap, etc.)
Muscular Contraction or Paralysis Produced by Disease (note relation to knowledge of epilepsy demonstrating recklessness for certain activities, e.g. driving)
Unconsciousness
E.g. mothers rolling over in their sleep
MPC § 2.01 – Voluntary Act, Omission, Possession
Same involuntary acts as above
Omission: must be expressly made punishable by the law, or there must be a duty to perform the act made by law
Possession requires: Knowledge with sufficient time to allow termination of possession
People v. Decina (p. 72)
Facts: Decina, who was prone to epileptic seizures, suffered an epileptic seizure while driving and ran over and killed several children
Rule: His awareness of a condition, which he knows may produce dangerous consequences, and his disregard of the consequences by participating in the act of driving, satisfies the voluntary act requirement for a negligent crime.
People v. Gastello (p. 73)
Facts: Gastello did not declare drugs on his person when he was brought into jail for another crime.
Rule: Same as Martin; he did not voluntarily enter jail.
Reasoning:
5th Amendment; Gastello was not compelled to incriminate himself for drug possession just because he was involuntarily taken to jail.
Exempting jail from the voluntary act doctrine would be a slippery slope enabling the state to take people places against their will for the sole purpose of charging them.
Omissions
See MPC 2.01 – omissions must be based on a duty to act or an explicitly punished omission in law
Billingslea v. State (p. 118) - Duty to Act vs. Forbidden Results
Facts: Defendant grossly neglected his mother which resulted in deterioration and later death, granddaughter had tried to intervene but Defendant would not grant her access
Rule: There must be a statutory duty to act in order for an omission to act to be criminal. When the statute does not pose a specific duty upon anyone, no one can be held liable for omitting to perform that duty.
Note: Had they charged him with preventing the granddaughter from providing care, he could have been convicted.
VTCA Penal Code (TEXAS)
§ 22.04: anyone who by act or omission causes injury, etc. to a person 65+ has committed an offense
In response to this case, 22.04(b) was modified to impose a duty to act if he had assumed “care, custody, or control of a child, elderly or invalid individual.”
§ 6.01(c): cannot be found guilty unless the statute provides that the omission is an offense or otherwise provides a statutory duty to act
Specific to Texas: Texas is highly faithful to its statutes and common law duties do not exist in TX unless they are included in a statute. In other jurisdictions, a court may have been able to read the common law duty into this case and convict D
General Omission Overview
Legal duty to act arises from a lot of sources
Usually arises from a statute
Also from contractual obligations
I.e. a lifeguard at a public pool
Also from relationships
Easiest case is the legal responsibility a parent has to safeguard a minor
Voluntary Assumption of Responsibility
You see someone incapacitated on the side of the road and you do nothing--you are not criminally liable (you’re an asshole though)
You see someone incapacitated on the side of the road and you take them into your home and then you do nothing--you are criminally liable
When you assert yourself to assume responsibility, you become liable
Relieve everyone else
Sometimes you’ve secreted the incapacitated person precluding other people from acting
Failure to Provide Sustenance:
Regina v. Instan. (p. 127): Common law duties arise from moral obligations, but mere moral obligation is not always sufficient to create duty.
Jones v. United States (p. 128): No duty to care for children when one was originally employed/paid to do so but then payments ended.
Medical Assistance for Drug Overdose
People v. Beardsley (p. 129): moving a passed out friend from his place into another friend’s room, she later died from there after an overdose -> no duty since it was of her own free will
People v. Oliver (p. 130): Defendant took a drunk man to her place, shot up heroin, left for the bar again and the man died of an OD -> duty existed because she took him into her care/custody
Duty to Rescue (p. 130)
Omission of Life-Sustaining Treatment – Barber v. Superior Court of LA County (p. 132)
Doctors can legally omit care that would prolong the life of individuals
Doctors cannot take an action that would hasten the process at the end of life
Make a distinction between an act and an omission, even when there is an incredibly small difference
Mens Rea
Common Law Mens Rea
Specific vs General Intent – DEFINES MISTAKE
Specific intent
Actual intention to do the action prohibited by the statute, and if ...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Criminal Law Outlines.
This outline covers a criminal law course taught by John C. Jeffries, co-author of the University Casebook Series textbook on Criminal Law. The outline details a wide range of topics within criminal law including common law and MPC treatment of mens rea and actus rea, theoretical principles behind crime and punishment, and the the laws of attempt, conspiracy/complicity, RICO, sexual offenses, justification and excuse, and the insanity defense. Each of the two contributed to this outline received ...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started