Jones v. U.S.
– Δ took in a friend’s baby & baby dies of malnutrition (neglect). Court says an omission isculpable when there is a legal duty, not just a moral one. Court identifies 4 situations where a failure to actis a breach of duty:i.Where a statute imposes a duty to care for another ii.Where one stands in a certain status relationship to another iii.Where one has assumed a contractual duty to care for another iv.Where one has voluntarily assumed the care of another and so secluded the helpless person as to prevent others from rendering aid.
MPC § 2.01 (4)
– Possession is an act if the possessor knowingly procured or received, or was aware of hiscontrol of it for enough time in which he could terminate his possession.i.
– the power and intention to exercise control, or dominion and control,over an object not in one's "actual" possession1.Elements are (1) effective power over the thing possessed, and (2) the intention to control it.2.
United States v. Maldonado
– Drug delivery supposed to go to Palestino, but he wasn’t there.So Δ tells deliverer to come to his room, and tries to reach Palestino. Cocaine left in room,and Δ & deliverer went for a soda. Δ then arrested for possession. Court says possession notonly immediate physical possession, but also constructive possession. Cocaine left in room Δwas occupying & could easily return at will.
a.A person cannot be guilty of a crime in the absence of voluntary conducti.
Martin v. State
– Δ arrested from home, taken onto public highway, and charged for being drunk in public. Court holds that the act element in the statute, that he appear in public, must be voluntary.Here, Δ was involuntarily taken into public by police.1.
– if you go far enough back, you can find voluntariness. He voluntarily gotdrunk in his home – probably not enough. But if he did something that would reasonablycause him to be in public, he voluntarily created that situation. b.Purpose of Voluntariness Requirementi.Utilitarian - Criminal law cannot hope to deter involuntary behavior.ii.Retributive - Not fair to make someone liable for actions beyond their controlc.
MPC § 2.01 (2)
– Enumerates which acts are not voluntary (& only these): (a) a reflex or convulsion; (b) a bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep; (c) conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion; (d) a bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of theeffort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual.ii.
People v. Grant
– Δ assaults a police officer; his defense is that he suffers from epilepsy/seizure. If the conscious mind loses control over the body's acts, then the act was not voluntary (unless theinvoluntariness was anticipated – Δ acted to cause a situation where it would happen).1.
- If there is adequate prior notice of the person's susceptibilityto engage in involuntary conduct, and still acts consciously to cause that behavior, then thoseactions are voluntary (widen the "time-frame").a.
People v. Decina
– Δ knew he was prone to seizures, and while driving, has a seizure& kills 4 ppl. The voluntary act is the choice to drive, knowing you’re prone toseizures. (diff if first time condition – like a heart attack, no warning).2.Insanity – still voluntary because you’re making a choice to move your body.