You are on page 1of 9

Final Outline MPC y General intent offense o Means D need not possess an intention that sexual intercourse be nonconsensual

213 MPC y Rape y Gross sexual imposition y Deciate sexual intercourse y Corruption of minors y Sexual assault y Indecednt exposure Rape y Guilty if 1. Acting purposely or knowingly or recklessly of each material element y Elements 1. Female is less than 10 years of age 2. Female is unconscious 3. He compels female to submit by force or by threatening a. Her or another person with imminent i. Death ii. Grievous bodily harm iii. Extreme pain iv. Kidnapping or 4. He administers or employs drugs or intoxicants in manner substantially impairs female s ability to appraise/ control conduct Gross sexual imposition y Felony in 3rd degree y If he has sexual intercourse with female in 3 circumstances 1. If female submits as result threat that would prevent resistance by woman of ordinary resolution 2. Woman of ordinary resolution a. Objective standard Broader than Common Law because y Sexual intercourse includes o Genital or o Oral or o Anal sexual penetration by male of female y Defined in terms of male s acts of aggression rather than negative terms of female s lack on consent y Define broader

against the will of the female.o Act is committed if female submits as result of violence at third party o If victim submits as a result of threat to kidnap her or another 1st degree 1. Female was not a voluntary social companion who had previously permitted him sexual liberties. and y Sexual intercourse procured by fraud in the factum y Gender-neutral y Varing degrees y Marital immunity rule has been narrowed or abolished Rape: Actus Reus Sexual intercourse by male. By means of certain forms of deception a. Required to show force and resistance was used 1. Fraud in the Factum i. Traditional law i. If perp used or threatened to use extreme force 2. D inflicted serious bodily injury to her or another in course of rape or 2. if male exerted moderate force will not cause conviction unless resistance was overcome by force 3. Traditionally. y Gender-specific Reformed y Can be nonforcible. with female not his wife is rape if committed 1. Upon a female incompetent to give consent Rape: Mens Rea y It is enough that he possessed morally blameworthy state of mind regarding female s lack of consent . but nonconsensual y By a male with an unconscious or drugged female. Consent is invalid if she is unaware that she has consented to act of sexual intercourse itself 3. Felony of 2nd degree y All circumstances other than ones in 1st degree Common law Traditional (non-reformed) y Sexual intercourse achieved forcibly. Requires proof that female did not consent ii. While the female is asleep or unconscious or 4. Must be a threat of force not merely fear of 2. Forcibly a. and without her consent.

all elements of offense changed cannot be proven y Negation of an element required by definition of offense y Example . or permissible thing . or right thing. because of the conditions that are basis for defense. a felony with severe penalties.Mistake Offense modification y Introduce criminalization decisions similar to those used in defining offenses y While actor satisfied all elements of offense. he has no tin fact caused the harm sought to be prevented by statute y Victim of a crime may not be held as an accomplice even though his conduct has aided the commission of the crime y Commonly apply to only one specific offense Justifications y Defines conduct otherwise criminal which under circumstances is socially acceptable y Deserved neither criminal liability nor even censure y Conduct that is good thing. into strict liability offense Marital Immunity Rule y Husband cannot be guilty of rape committed by him self upon his lawful wife y Abolished in 24 states Corroboration y Only required in few states Rape-Shield Statutes y Does not usually allow defense to cross examine witness absent good cause y Doesn t allow defense to bring in extrinsic evidence y Relevant evidence is admissible o Relevant tendancy to prove or disprove disputed fact at issue Defenses Categories of Defenses y Defense commonly used to mean any set of identifiable conditions or circumstances which may prevent a conviction for an offense 5 Defenses Failure to proof y D introduces evidence that demonstrates that the prosecution has failed to prove as essential element of offense y Consists of all instances in which.y y y No rape if he entertained genuine and reasonable belief that female voluntarily consented to intercourse Conforms to Common-law mistake of fact Reasonable mistake of fact converts rape.

y Such force is necessary o Cannot use deadly force if threat of non-deadly force y To protect himself from y Imminent use of o Occur immediately o Virtually certain will occur y Unlawful force y Aggressor would have no right to claim self-defense Deadly Force y Only justified if actor y Reasonably believe y Necessary to prevent y Imminent use of deadly force y Utilitarian o Self-defense killing is socially desirable if otherwise dangerous person would remain threat y Non-Utilitarian . D is blameworthy y y y Self-Defense y Reasonable belief o Subjective  D s belief that he need to use deadly force to repel o Objective  D s belief must be one that reasonable person in same situation would have possessed o Even if belief is genuine. but excuse actor because conditions suggest that actor is not responsible for deed y Example paranoid delusion Nonexculpatory public policy y Statute of limitations o Supported as fostering a more stable and forward-looking society y Purely public policy argument y D s conduct is harmful and creates no societal benefit. if it is unreasonable.Not alterations of statutory definition of harm sought to be prevented Harm caused by justified behavior remains a legally recognized harm to be avoided Harm is outweighed by need to avoid even greater harm of to further a greater societal interest Excuses y Ex: insanity y Centers upon actor and tries to show that actor is not nature of claim even though actor has harmed society y Should not be blamed or punished for causing harm y Usually general defenses applicable to all offenses y Admit that deed may be wrong.

forfeits right to life o Physical security as natural rights Necessity: Retreat y Deadly force is unnecessary if person can retreat and avoid killing aggressor y No retreat rule o Majority of jurisdictions a non aggressor is permitted to use deadly force to repel an unlawful deadly attack even if can retreat y Castle exception o non aggressor is not ordinarily requires to retreat from his dwelling before using deadly force in self-defense MPC y Force o Justified in using when believes force is immediately necessary to protect himself o Actor s subjective belief o Language authorizes self-protect sooner than common law y Deadly force o Unjustifiable unless actor believes force is immediatel necessary against o Death o Serious bodily injury o Forcible rape o Kidnapping y Prohibited o Retreat not use deadly force if aggressor is he knows he can aboid by safely retreating o If D acts with nondeadly force and V escalates it to deadly force. D can use delf-defense Defense of Others MPC y D can use force to protect a 3rd party if o D uses no more force to protect X than would for self-protection o Under circumstances as D believes them to be. X would be justified in using self-defense o D believes that her intervention is necessary for X s protection y D does not have to retreat before using force though she might have for selfprotection y D is required to attempt to secure X s retreat If C would be requited to retreat under self-protection.o Defensibe killing = justifiable because aggressorm by threatening innocvent person. but only if X can reach complete safety Defense of Property and Habitation Common law .

robbery. burglary. or felonious theft or prop destruction o Such force is immediately necessary to prevent commission or comsummation of offense and tiehr o Other person previously used or threatened to use deadly force against him or another person or o Use of nondeadly force to prevent commission or soncummation of the offense would expose him or another innocent person to substantial danger of seirous bodily injury MPC Choice of evils y Person s conduct is justified if o He believes that his conduct is necessary to avoid harm to himself or another o The harm to be avoided by his conduct is greater than that sought to be avoided by law prohibiting his conduct o No legislative intent to exclusde conduct in such cirscumstances plainly exists o General appliciability May use no more force than reasonably appears necessary to defend interest in prop Deadly force is never permitted in defense of property Person may use deadly force to defend his home .y y y MPC Protect Prop y Person may use non-deadly force to prevent or terminate entry/ trespass upon land/ prop if believes o Other person s interference with prop is unlawful o The intrusion for whom he acts and o Nondeadly force with immediately necessary Recapture Prop y Person may use nondeadly force to re-enter or recapture prop if o Believes that he or person whom he is acting was unlawfully dispossessed of the prop and o Either force is used immediately after dispossession o Even if it I not immediate he eieves oteh has no claim of possession o Re-entry is not ermitted unless actor also believes that it would constitute exceptional hardship to delay re-entry Deadly Force Dispossession of Dwelling y May use deadly force upon a intruder if he believes that o Intruder is seeking to dispossess him of dwelling o The intruder has no claim of right to possess dwelling and o Such force is immediately necessary to prevent dispossession Prevention of Serious Prop Crimes y Person may use deadly force inside dwelling or anywhere else if o The other person is attempting to commit or consummate arson.

imminent. and impending y Threat must typically be directed at D or family member y Not a defense to intentional killing MPC y Affirmative defense to unlawful conduct by D if o She was compelled to commit offense by use or threatened use of unlawful force by coerver upon her ot another o Person of reasonable firmness in her situation would have ben unable to resist coersion Intoxication y Disturbance of mental or physical capacities resulting from introduction of any substance into body Voluntary Intoxication y Courts commonly state that it is never excuse for criminal conduct Mens Rea y General intent o Not defense o Proves mens rea culpable state of mind y Specific intent o Is defense o If incapable of forming specific intent required by definition y Temporary Insanity o Not recognized by common law y Fixed Insanity o Long term use of drugs o Defense usually when not intoxicated Involuntary Intoxication y If actor is not to blame for becoming intoxicated y Coersion y Mistake y Unexpectedly from prescribed meication .Duress or Coercion y Is a justification y Person will be acquitted of anything other than murder if o Another person threatened to kill or grievously injure actor or 3rd party o Actor reasonably believed that the threat ws genuine o Threat was present imminent and impending at time of criminal act o There was no reasonable escape from threat except through compliance of demands o Actor was not a fault in exposing herself to the threat y Threat must come from human y Coercer must threaten to cause death or seirous bodily harm y Deadly force threatened must be imminent or as some courts put it present.

when relevant. to negate the mens rea of any crime y Specific intent used y General intent can t use y Some jurisdictions say can use to prove insanity but not to show lack of capacity from element Partial Responsibility Defense y Only defense to murder to mitigate to manslaughter MPC y Homicide would be manslaughter if EMED .MPC 3 Types y Self-induced intoxication y Pathological intoxication y Intoxication that is not self-induced y No difference between general/ specific intent y Does not negate recklessness y Voluntary act Intoxication as Affirmative defense if y Actor suffered from pathological intoxication or that was not self-induced y Actor s condition qualifies under American Law s Institute s test of insanity Insanity Person is incompetent if y Lacks capacity to consult with attorney with reasonable degree of rational understanding y Lacks a rational as well as factual understanding of proceedings against her y Physical/ mental handicap y Determined by judge y Criminal proceedings must be suspended until deemed competent Affirmative defense y Up to D to prove defense y Clear and convincing evidence MPC Person not responsible if y Lack capacity to appreciate criminality of conduct y Or to conform her conduct to requirements of the law Diminished Capacity y Mens Rea form o Failure of proof defense o Evidence of mental abnormality is evidence to negate an element of the crime charged MPC Defense to All Crimes y Permit introduction of evidence.

its conspiracy Mens Rea and MPC 5.Solcitation Actus Reus words/conduct to entice/ urge/ ask/ encourage to do crime y If person agrees.02 Conspiracy y When person accepts solicitation Law mutual agreement express or implied between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act or unlawful action used to commit a lawful act Mens Rea y Intent to agree y Intent to commit underling crime Actus Reus y Agreement itself .