Common Law - Criminal Homicid
Criminal Homicide Analysis - Common Law
1. Did the defendant commit the actus reus of murder
a. Voluntary act or omission
b. Social Harm (killing of another human being)
c. Causation (actual and proximate cause)
2. Mens rea for murder?
a. Intent to kill a human being, which includes awareness that death would result from one’s actions
b. Intent to cause grievous bodily harm, which includes awareness that grievous bodily harm would result from one’s actions
c. Depraved-heart murder: Extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk.
i. Depraved heart murder consists of “an act, the natural consequences of which are dangerous to life, which act was deliberately performed by a person who knows that his conduct endangers the life of another and who acts with conscious disregard for life.”
d. Intent to commit a felony, strict liability for homicide during commission of a felony
3. Is it first or second degree murder?
a. First degree murder requires “malice aforethought:
i. Intent to kill;
ii. Deliberation; and
1. Focuses on the quality of the thinking process
2. To deliberate is to measure and evaluate the major facets of a choice or problem
iii. Premeditation.
1. Focuses on the quantity of time
2. Killing is done after a period of time for prior consideration
a. Duration may be a short period of time
b. Any interval of time between the forming of the intent to kill and the execution of that intent, which is sufficient duration for the accused to be fully conscious of what he intended is sufficient
iv. Premeditation and deliberation characterize a thought process undisturbed by hot blood
b. Felony Murder Rule: First degree murder also includes homicide that occurs during the commission of a specifically listed felony. (See Felony Murder Rule Limitations Analysis)
i. A defendant is guilty of murder if death results from conduct during the commission or attempted commission of any felony, even where the defendant lacks the culpability required for murder.
c. All other types of murder are second-degree murder (Intentional killings not premeditated and deliberate, intent-to-inflict-grievous-bodily-injury killings, depraved heart killings)
4. Should the crime be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter? (“Heat of Passion” Excuse)
a. There must be adequate provocation
i. For provocation to be adequate, it must be “calculated to inflame the passion of a reasonable man and tend to cause him to act in the moment from passion rather than reason.”
1. Reasonable Man - Subjective Characteristics?
a. Determining the gravity of the provocation
i. The jury can take into consideration all those factors which in their opinion would affect the gravity of taunts and insults when applied to the person to whom they are addressed
b. Assessing the level of self-control to be expected of the “reasonable man”
i. The “reasonable man” is a “person having the power of self-control to be expected of an ordinary person of the sex and age of the accused.”
ii. Girouard v. State, Maryland CoA 1991: Words alone are not sufficient provocation
b. The killing must be in the heat of passion
c. There must be a sudden heat of passion (no cooling time)
d. There must have been a causal connection between the provocation, the passion, and the homicide.
5. If the defendant committed the actus reus of murder, but did not act with the mens rea required for murder, is the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter?
a. The relevant standard is gross negligence
i. Defendant should have known the risk of death, but didn’t
ii. Failure to do so was a gross deviation from the standard for conduct of a reasonable person
Common Law Felony Murder Limitations - Analysis
1. Does the jurisdiction apply the agency approach or the proximate causation approach to felony murder?
a. Under the agency approach, a felon can be liable only for any deaths caused by her accomplices.
b. Under the proximate causation approach, a felon can be liable for a death caused by a non-felon if the felon set in motion the acts that resulted in the victim’s death.
2. If a first-degree murder statute criminalizes the commission of murder in the perpetration of the specified felonies in the statute, then any murder that occurs during the commission of one of those felonies is first degree murder.
3. If the felony does not appear in the first-degree murder statute, then ask: Is the felony an inherently dangerous felony?
a. Test
i. Look at elements of the felony in the abstract, not the particular facts of the case
ii. Whether the felony by its nature cannot be committed without creating a substantial risk that someone will be killed?
1. Or, is there any way the felony can be committed without a substantial risk of death?
b. If yes, proceed to Step #4
c. If no, the defendant is not liable for felony murder
4. If the felony does not appear in the first-degree murder statute, but it is an inherently dangerous felony, then ask: Does the merger limitation apply?
a. Merger limitation: felony murder rule is inapplicable to felonies that are an integral part of the homicide and which evidence shows to be an offense included in fact within the offense charged.
i. Under the merger doctrine, the defendant is not liable for felony murder if the felony is:
1. An “assaultive” felony (defined as “a felony that involves the threat of immediate injury”) and
2. Its only purpose is to harm the victim
b. If no, the defendant is liable for second-degree felony murder
c. If yes, the defendant is not liable for felony murder
MPC - Criminal Homicide
MPC Criminal Homicide Analysis
“A person is guilty of criminal homicide if they purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently causes the death of another human being.”
1. Murder
a. When the actor kills another:
i. Purposely or knowingly; or
ii. Recklessly PLUS under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life. Section 210.2(1).
1. MPC’s Felony Murder Approach: Such recklessness and indifference are presumed if the actor is engaged or is an accomplice in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit
a. Robbery
b. Rape or deviate sexual intercourse by force or threat of force
c. Arson
d. Burglary
e. Kidnapping
f. Felonious Escape
2. Defendant given opportunity to rebut this presumption. Not a strict liability.
2. Manslaughter
a. A person is guilty of manslaughter if:
i. They recklessly kill another; or
1. No clear answer on how this is different from “recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life”
ii. Kills another person under circumstances that would ordinarily constitute murder, but where homicide is committed as the result of:
1. “Extreme mental or emotional” disturbance
2. For which there is a “reasonable explanation or excuse” for the disturbance,
a. Which is “determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor’s situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.”
i. External circumstances have to be taken into account (person’s disability, etc)
ii. Idiosyncratic moral values are not to be taken into account (bigotry)
3. Differences from common law “Heat of Passion”
a. Does not require “adequate provocation”
b. No fixed category of adequate circumstances
c. No rigid cooling off rule
i. “Extreme emotional disturbance may be based upon a series of events, rather than a single precipitating cause.”
3. Negligent homicide
a. A criminal homicide is negligent homicide when it is committed negligently (gross negligence required)
b. “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.”
Criminal Homicide Analysis - Common Law
1. Did the defendant commit the actus reus of murder
a. Voluntary act or omission
b. Social Harm (killing of another human being)
c. Causation (actual and proximate cause)
2. Mens rea for murder?
a. Intent to kill a human being, which includes awareness that death would result from one’s actions
b. Intent to cause grievous bodily harm, which includes awareness that grievous bodily harm would result from one’s actions
c. Depraved-heart murder: Extreme recklessness regarding homicidal risk.
i. Depraved heart murder consists of “an act, the natural consequences of which are dangerous to life, which act was deliberately performed by a person who knows that his conduct endangers the life of another and who acts with conscious disregard for life.”
d. Intent to commit a felony, strict liability for homicide during commission of a felony
3. Is it first or second degree murder?
a. First degree murder requires “malice aforethought:
i. Intent to kill;
ii. Deliberation; and
1. Focuses on the quality of the thinking process
2. To deliberate is to measure and evaluate the major facets of a choice or problem
iii. Premeditation.
1. Focuses on the quantity of time
2. Killing is done after a period of time for prior consideration
a. Duration may be a short period of time
b. Any interval of time between the forming of the intent to kill and the execution of that intent, which is sufficient duration for the accused to be fully conscious of what he intended is sufficient
iv. Premeditation and deliberation characterize a thought process undisturbed by hot blood
b. Felony Murder Rule: First degree murder also includes homicide that occurs during the commission of a specifically listed felony. (See Felony Murder Rule Limitations Analysis)
i. A defendant is guilty of murder if death results from conduct during the commission or attempted commission of any felony, even where the defendant lacks the culpability required for murder.
c. All other types of murder are second-degree murder (Intentional killings not premeditated and deliberate, intent-to-inflict-grievous-bodily-injury killings, depraved heart killings)
4. Should the crime be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter? (“Heat of Passion” Excuse)
a. There must be adequate provocation
i. For provocation to be adequate, it must be “calculated to inflame the passion of a reasonable man and tend to cause him to act in the moment from passion rather than reason.”
1. Reasonable Man - Subjective Characteristics?
a. Determining the gravity of the provocation
i. The jury can take into consideration all those factors which in their opinion would affect the gravity of taunts and insults when applied to the person to whom they are addressed
b. Assessing the level of self-control to be expected of the “reasonable man”
i. The “reasonable man” is a “person having the power of self-control to be expected of an ordinary person of the sex and age of the accused.”
ii. Girouard v. State, Maryland CoA 1991: Words alone are not sufficient provocation
b. The killing must be in the heat of passion
c. There must be a sudden heat of passion (no cooling time)
d. There must have been a causal connection between the provocation, the passion, and the homicide.
5. If the defendant committed the actus reus of murder, but did not act with the mens rea required for murder, is the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter?
a. The relevant standard is gross negligence
i. Defendant should have known the risk of death, but didn’t
ii. Failure to do so was a gross deviation from the standard for conduct of a reasonable person
Common Law Felony Murder Limitations - Analysis
1. Does the jurisdiction apply the agency approach or the proximate causation approach to felony murder?
a. Under the agency approach, a felon can be liable only for any deaths caused by her accomplices.
b. Under the proximate causation approach, a felon can be liable for a death caused by a non-felon if the felon set in motion the acts that resulted in the victim’s death.
2. If a first-degree murder statute criminalizes the commission of murder in the perpetration of the specified felonies in the statute, then any murder that occurs during the commission of one of those felonies is first degree murder.
3. If the felony does not appear in the first-degree murder statute, then ask: Is the felony an inherently dangerous felony?
a. Test
i. Look at elements of the felony in the abstract, not the particular facts of the case
ii. Whether the felony by its nature cannot be committed without creating a substantial risk that someone will be killed?
1. Or, is there any way the felony can be committed without a substantial risk of death?
b. If yes, proceed to Step #4
c. If no, the defendant is not liable for felony murder
4. If the felony does not appear in the first-degree murder statute, but it is an inherently dangerous felony, then ask: Does the merger limitation apply?
a. Merger limitation: felony murder rule is inapplicable to felonies that are an integral part of the homicide and which evidence shows to be an offense included in fact within the offense charged.
i. Under the merger doctrine, the defendant is not liable for felony murder if the felony is:
1. An “assaultive” felony (defined as “a felony that involves the threat of immediate injury”) and
2. Its only purpose is to harm the victim
b. If no, the defendant is liable for second-degree felony murder
c. If yes, the defendant is not liable for felony murder
MPC - Criminal Homicide
MPC Criminal Homicide Analysis
“A person is guilty of criminal homicide if they purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently causes the death of another human being.”
1. Murder
a. When the actor kills another:
i. Purposely or knowingly; or
ii. Recklessly PLUS under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life. Section 210.2(1).
1. MPC’s Felony Murder Approach: Such recklessness and indifference are presumed if the actor is engaged or is an accomplice in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit
a. Robbery
b. Rape or deviate sexual intercourse by force or threat of force
c. Arson
d. Burglary
e. Kidnapping
f. Felonious Escape
2. Defendant given opportunity to rebut this presumption. Not a strict liability.
2. Manslaughter
a. A person is guilty of manslaughter if:
i. They recklessly kill another; or
1. No clear answer on how this is different from “recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life”
ii. Kills another person under circumstances that would ordinarily constitute murder, but where homicide is committed as the result of:
1. “Extreme mental or emotional” disturbance
2. For which there is a “reasonable explanation or excuse” for the disturbance,
a. Which is “determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor’s situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.”
i. External circumstances have to be taken into account (person’s disability, etc)
ii. Idiosyncratic moral values are not to be taken into account (bigotry)
3. Differences from common law “Heat of Passion”
a. Does not require “adequate provocation”
b. No fixed category of adequate circumstances
c. No rigid cooling off rule
i. “Extreme emotional disturbance may be based upon a series of events, rather than a single precipitating cause.”
3. Negligent homicide
a. A criminal homicide is negligent homicide when it is committed negligently (gross negligence required)
b. “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.”
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire