Criminal Law Overview (Textbook 20-232)

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Download our mobile app to listen on the go

Get App

Questions and Answers

What is the reasonable apprehension of bodily harm in assault cases?

It refers to the victim's perception that they are in imminent danger of physical harm due to the defendant's actions.

How does common law define an attempted battery?

Common law defines it as actions that lead to an attempted physical contact with intent to harm another person.

Explain the difference between completed and incomplete attempts in criminal law.

A completed attempt is when the defendant has taken sufficient steps and the crime fails, while an incomplete attempt occurs when the defendant is still in the process and is interrupted before completion.

What elements must be proven to establish the crime of battery?

It must be shown that the defendant intentionally or knowingly made physical contact with another in a provoking or insulting manner. Signup and view all the answers

Describe the intent requirement for kidnapping under the law.

The intent must be for a nefarious purpose, which involves confining or carrying away a victim without consent. Signup and view all the answers

What must a defendant show to successfully claim a defense against battery?

The defendant must demonstrate that they had legal justification for their actions which led to the physical contact. Signup and view all the answers

What is the significance of intent in the context of assault?

Intent in assault is crucial as it establishes the defendant's mindset in causing reasonable apprehension of harm to another person. Signup and view all the answers

How does the Model Penal Code (MPC) differ from common law regarding assault?

The MPC encompasses both assault and battery under a single offense, whereas common law treats them as distinct crimes. Signup and view all the answers

How does the foreseeability of an intervening act affect the determination of legal causation?

Foreseeable intervening acts do not break the causal chain, while unforeseeable acts may. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of State v. Smith, what role did the victim's failure to take medication play in the legal analysis?

The victim's failure was deemed a self-inflicted harm that did not break the causal chain as it was not abnormal or unforeseeable. Signup and view all the answers

Distinguish between coincidental and responsive acts in terms of their impact on causation.

Coincidental acts inherently are not foreseeable and can break the causal chain, whereas responsive acts can only break it if they are unforeseeable and abnormal. Signup and view all the answers

What defines 'malice aforethought' in the context of intentional murder under Cal Penal Code § 187?

'Malice aforethought' is the intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, reflecting a premeditated mindset. Signup and view all the answers

What is the key difference between express malice and implied malice in the context of murder?

Express malice involves a deliberate intent to kill, while implied malice refers to actions done with a depraved heart, showing reckless disregard for human life. Signup and view all the answers

Explain why medical negligence could be considered a responsive act in legal terms.

Medical negligence may break the causal chain if the negligence is deemed unforeseeable and abnormal in the context of the victim's condition. Signup and view all the answers

Under what circumstances can a defendant be charged with felony murder?

A defendant can be charged with felony murder if they commit or attempt to commit a felony and a person dies as a direct and foreseeable result of that felony. Signup and view all the answers

Explain the Merger Doctrine and its implications for felony murder charges.

The Merger Doctrine states that if the felony is assaultive, it cannot be used as a basis for a felony murder charge, as such crimes inherently involve immediate threats of harm. Signup and view all the answers

Identify the relevance of preexisting conditions when assessing the legality of an act resulting in death.

Preexisting conditions can be considered when evaluating whether a defendant's act was the proximate cause of death or if it was a natural progression of the victim's condition. Signup and view all the answers

In what circumstances might a victim's self-harming behavior not absolve a defendant from liability?

If the self-harm is a foreseeable response to the defendant's actions, it may not absolve the defendant from liability. Signup and view all the answers

How does the reasonable person standard apply in assessing a defendant's intent?

The reasonable person standard is used to evaluate whether a defendant's actions were justified based on how a typical person would act under similar circumstances. Signup and view all the answers

What constitutes voluntary manslaughter in legal terms?

Voluntary manslaughter involves intentionally killing another person in the heat of passion provoked by adequate provocation. Signup and view all the answers

Under the MPC, what is the definition of a 'human being' in relation to homicide?

A 'human being' is defined as a person who has been born and is alive. Signup and view all the answers

Define involuntary manslaughter and give an example of conduct that could lead to such a charge.

Involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of another person resulting from reckless conduct or criminal negligence, such as driving under the influence and causing an accident. Signup and view all the answers

What is the role of accomplices in felony murder cases?

Accomplices to the felony can be charged with murder even if they did not directly participate in the killing, as long as the death occurred during the commission of the felony. Signup and view all the answers

What must be proven to establish that a crime was inherently dangerous in the context of felony murder?

It must be shown that the crime in question poses a significant risk of death or serious injury, either in its abstract form or based on the specific facts of the case. Signup and view all the answers

Flashcards

Intervening Act

An event that occurs after the initial act and contributes to the harm. It might break the chain of causation.

Coincidental Act

An intervening event that by itself is unexpected and breaks the chain of causation unless it's foreseeable.

Responsive Act

An intervening act that is a reaction to the initial harm; it breaks the chain of causation only if unforeseeable and abnormal.

State v. Smith

Case illustrating that a victim's response (failure to medicate) wasn't unforeseeable and abnormal, so it didn't break the chain of causation in assault and involuntary manslaughter.