All right, law students, let's dive into criminal law.
Yeah, it's a big one, right? Huge, especially with the bar
exam coming. Up.
It's one of those subjects. Lots to cover.
But don't worry, this deep dive is going to help you out.
Definitely, we'll break it down. More than just memorizing
definitions. Exactly understanding how it all
works. Real life examples, exam tips,
you know the good stuff. The stuff that gets you points,
yeah. So grab those notes.
Practice questions. And let's get started.
First up, the foundation. The essentials.
Actus Reus and Mens Rea. Ah, the dynamic duo.
You got to know these inside now.
They're the heart of criminal liability.
OK, so actus Reus. That's the guilty act.
But it's not just any action, right?
No, it has to be volunteer. So like if I trip and
accidentally bump into someone. Then they get hurt.
No, that's not a crime. Clumsy, not criminal, right?
Exactly. The law's not about punishing
accidents. OK, makes sense.
But then you've got omissions, failures to act.
Like if you see someone in danger and you don't help.
Well, generally you're not obligated to be a hero.
Unless there's a legal duty. Right, like a parent's duty to
their child. So if a parent doesn't feed
their child. And the child suffers harm that
inaction. Becomes actus Reus because of
that duty. Exactly.
It's about more than just doing something bad.
It's about failing to do something you're obligated to
do. You got it.
OK, so we've got the guilty act down.
Now for the guilty mind Mens Rea.
This is where things get a little more.
I don't know psychological. Yeah, it's about the mental
state. Were they acting intentionally,
recklessly, negligently? All those different shades of
culpability. And the level of men's ray
affects the crime Absolutely. So borrowing my roommate's car
without asking. Versus stealing it to sell for
profit. Very different intentions, very
different crimes. Huge difference, yeah.
OK, so intent is key. Definitely a major factor.
But what about those situations where like, you didn't mean to
hurt anyone? But your actions were still
maybe reckless. Yeah, reckless or negligent.
How does that work? Well, recklessness.
That's about consciously disregarding a risk.
Like driving drunk, even if you don't intend to cause an
accident. You know it's dangerous, you do
it anyway. Right, that's the recklessness.
Exactly. Conscious disregard.
And negligence. That's more about failing to
exercise reasonable care. Like leaving a loaded gun where
a child could reach it. Yeah, you didn't intend for
anyone to get hurt. But you were careless.
And that carelessness had consequences, right?
So you could still be held accountable.
Exactly. OK, that makes sense.
Now there's one more category of Mens Rea.
Oh yeah. Strict liability.
This is where like, even if you didn't know, you were doing
something wrong. You can still be held liable.
Yeah. So no mental state required.
No, the ACT itself is enough. What kind of crimes fall under
that? Usually things involving public
safety, regulatory stuff, selling alcohol to a minor.
Classic example. Even if you didn't know they
were underage. Even then, yeah.
The focus is on protecting minors, not the seller's intent.
OK, so we've got actus Reus, the guilty act.
And Mens Rea, the guilty mind. But there's more to it, right?
Absolutely. It's not just about having those
two things present. They have to be connected in a
specific way. That's where concurrence and
causation come in. You got it.
All right, let's unpack those. Starting with concurrence.
Yeah, sounds fancy. What does it actually mean?
It means the guilty act and guilty mind happened together.
At the same time. Right, the intent has to be
driving the action. So thinking about doing
something bad earlier. Doesn't make it a crime.
It's got to be that thought leading to the action.
Yeah, like let's say you see someone you dislike.
Yeah, and you think about tripping them.
But later you bump into them accidentally at the store.
And they get hurt. No concurrence, right?
Nope. The thought and the action were
separate. No crime, just bad luck for
them. Exactly.
OK, concurrence check. Now for causation.
This one seems simple. You do something, it causes a
result. But the law loves to complicate
things. I figured there's factual
causation and proximate causation.
OK, break it down for me. Factual causation.
That's the but for test. But for the defendants actions,
the harm wouldn't have happened. Exactly.
Like if someone sets a fire that burns down a building.
But for their actions, no fire, no damage.
OK, that's pretty clear. Proximate causation gets a
little trickier. How so?
It's about foreseeability. Was a harm a natural result of
the actions? So even if someone was the
factual 'cause. They might not be liable if the
harm was too remote, too unpredictable.
Examples. Let's say you splash water on a
pedestrian while driving. They get startled, jump back,
trip and break their ankle. You're the factual cause the
splash led to the jump paw. The proximate cause.
Probably not. The broken ankle was too far
removed from the splash. Too many other things could have
happened in between. Exactly.
It wasn't a foreseeable consequence.
OK, starting to see how this all fits together.
It's like a. Puzzle all these pieces.
Actus Reus, Mens Rea concurrence causation.
Got to have them all for a crime to occur.
And understanding these is key to, well, everything in criminal
law. Absolutely the foundation for
analyzing any crime. OK, I'm ready to see how this
works in practice. Let's.
Move on to specific crimes then. Sounds good, hit me with it.
So specific crimes, right? This is where it gets real.
Yeah, let's see how those principles play out.
Crimes against persons. Those are a big one.
Crimes that harm another individual.
Right. And homicide is the most
serious, obviously. But there are different types of
homicides. Oh yeah, it's not a
one-size-fits-all thing. So how do we break it down?
Well, the most serious is first degree murder.
That's like premeditation, right?
Planned out. Exactly.
Deliberate, intentional killing. Like lying in wait or hiring a
hit man. Those are classic examples.
So premeditation is key for first degree.
Absolutely. It distinguishes it from other
types. OK, what about second degree
murder then? Still intentional, but without
that premeditation. More like a crime of passion.
Yeah, sometimes it's described as malice aforethought.
Meaning the intent was there, but not planned in advance.
Right. Like a fight that escalates,
someone gets killed in the heat of the moment.
Still intentional, but not a premeditated.
Act exactly. OK, so we've got intentional
killings covered. But what about when it's not
intentional? Like accidental but still
resulting from someone's actions.
That's where manslaughter comes in.
OK, manslaughter. And that's divided into
voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter.
What makes it voluntary? Often it's about heat of
passion. Like you're provoked and you
lose control. Yeah, the classic example is
someone walking in on their spouse cheating.
And they kill the spouse or the other person in a fit of rage.
That could be voluntary manslaughter.
Yeah, because a reasonable person might react that way in
that situation. It's about recognizing that
extreme emotions can lead to extreme actions.
OK, makes sense. What about involuntary
manslaughter then? That's more about recklessness
or negligence. Like the drunk driving example.
Perfect example. Didn't intend to kill anyone,
but their actions were reckless. And resulted in a death.
So it's involuntary manslaughter, right?
OK. So we got first degree, second
degree, voluntary, involuntary. Covers a lot of ground.
But there's one more, right Felony murder.
Yes, felony murder. This one's a bit unique.
This is where like, you don't even have to intend to kill.
Yeah, it's about deaths that occur during the Commission of a
dangerous felony. So if I'm robbing a bank with a
partner and they shoot someone? Even if you didn't pull the
trigger. I could still be charged with
felony murder, yeah. That's the idea, yeah.
Because by participating in the felony, I'm creating that risk.
Exactly. The law holds you accountable
those consequences. Even if I didn't want anyone to
get hurt. It's about the inherent danger
of the felony itself. OK, felony murder.
Got it. A bit of a tough one, but I
think I understand. So it's an important concept.
So that's homicide in a nutshell.
Lots of nuances, but those are the main types.
What other crimes against persons are there?
Assault and battery, those are common ones.
Oh yeah, those are often lumped together, but they're different,
right? Yeah, definitely.
Assault is the threat of harm. Like I swing a bat at someone
but I miss. Still assault.
You created that fear of harm. But no actual contact, so no
battery. Right battery requires the
contact the unlawful use of force.
So I connect with that bat swing.
That's battery. And like homicide, there are
different levels of severity. Based on the harm caused if a
weapon was used, things like that.
Exactly. OK, Assault and battery check.
And then you've got sexual offenses.
This is a whole other area, lots of legal complexities.
Yeah, consent is the key element here.
Rape, sexual fault, statutory rape, All about lack of consent.
Very important to understand those concepts.
OK, so we've got crimes against persons covered.
Homicide, assault, battery, sexual offenses.
The big ones. That way.
Let's move on to crimes against property.
All right, time to protect those possessions.
This is all about interfering with someone's ownership or
possession. So theft, basically.
Larceny is the basic one. Yeah, like I take my neighbor's
lawnmower without asking. But you bring it back the next
day. Probably not larceny.
No intent to permanently deprive them.
Exactly that intent is crucial. But if I sold it, that's a
different story. Then it's larceny.
You intended to keep it. OK, larceny.
Check. What about burglary?
This one's more than just breaking into a house.
It is, yeah. It's about unlawful entry with
the intent to commit another crime inside.
So breaking into steal something that's burglary.
Classic example, but it could be other crimes too like assault,
vandalism, anything that's a crime once you're inside.
OK, so the intent to commit the crime has to be there at the
time of entry? That's what separates it from
trespassing. Got you Burglary.
Check now for robbery. Robbery takes theft up a notch,
so it involves force or the threat of force.
So it's theft plus assault basically.
Exactly like holding up a store with a weapon.
Not just taking the money, you're using force to get it.
Right, that element of force or intimidation is key.
OK, robbery. Got it.
What else? Embezzlement is another one you
should know. This is where someone like
misuses funds they were entrusted with.
Exactly. Violation of trust.
Taking advantage of their position.
Like a financial advisor stealing from their clients.
That's a common example. OK, embezzlement makes sense.
What about arson? Arson.
That's the intentional burning of property.
So if my house burns down because I left the stove on,
that's. Not arson, that's an accident.
But if I set fire to my neighbor's car out of revenge?
That's arson, intentional and malicious.
Got it. Intent is key there too.
It's all about the elements of each crime, you know.
Preving those elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
That's what the prosecution has to do.
OK, I think I'm getting the hang of these property crimes.
Good, good. They're a big part of criminal
law. So we've done crimes against
persons, crimes against property.
What's next? What other categories are there?
Let's talk about inchoate offenses.
Inchoate. That's a new one.
It basically means incomplete crimes.
So crimes that didn't actually happen.
Yeah, but you can still be punished for them.
Wait, why if no crime happened? The law recognizes the danger in
planning and preparing. So it's about preventing those
crimes from happening in the first place.
Exactly deterring people from taking those first steps.
OK, I guess that makes sense. Examples.
Attempt conspiracy and solicitation.
Those are the big three. All right, let's break those
down, starting with attempt. Attempt is, well, trying to
commit a crime but failing like I.
Try to pickpocket someone but they catch me before I get the
wallet. That's attempt at theft.
Yeah. So intent to commit the crime,
plus a substantial step towards doing it.
Exactly both of those are needed.
What counts as a substantial step?
That can be tricky, depends on the specific facts.
But it has to be more than just thinking about it.
Right, there has to be some action taken towards committing
the crime. OK, attempt.
Got it. What about conspiracy?
Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to
commit a crime. So we're all sitting around
planning a bank robbery. Even if you never actually
robbed the bank. Just the agreement itself is
enough to be a crime. Yeah, it's about that collective
intent to engage in criminal activity.
Wow. OK, conspiracy check.
What about solicitation? Solicitation is asking or
encouraging someone else to commit a crime.
Like hiring a hit man. That's a classic example, yeah.
So even if the hit man doesn't do it.
The person who solicit them is still dutty.
It's about inciting that criminal activity.
Exactly. OK.
And Co weight offenses. Got it.
Attempt conspiracy solicitation. They're all about preventing
future crimes. By punishing those early stages.
Makes sense, right? Yeah, I think so.
It's all about deterring people from even considering these.
Acts and holding them accountable for their
intentions. OK, so we've done crimes against
persons, property and COVID offenses.
Feeling like a criminal law expert yet?
Almost, but I know there's one big piece missing.
Oh yeah. What's that?
Defenses. People commit crimes, but
sometimes there are reasons. Ah yes, defenses, a crucial part
of criminal law. We can't just assume everyone
who commits an act is automatically guilty.
There are circumstances that might excuse or justify their
actions. Exactly.
So how do defenses work? All right, defenses, right?
It's not always black and white. Yeah, sometimes there are valid
reasons for someone's actions. Or at least reasons that
mitigate their culpability. So how do we categorize
defenses? Generally there are two main
types, justifications and excuses.
Justification. That sounds like you did the
right thing. Yeah, even if it technically
broke the law. Like self-defense.
The classic example, you use force to protect yourself from
harm. So you're not denying you did
it, you're saying it was necessary?
Exactly. The circumstances justified your
actions. OK, what other justifications
are there? Defense of others, Same idea but
protecting someone else. A necessity.
Yeah, that's the lesser of two evils defense.
Like breaking into a store to steal food if you're starving.
That's the classic example, yeah.
OK. So justification is about doing
the right thing in a tough spot. Right now, excuses are a bit
different. How so?
Excuses focus on the defendant's mental state or the
circumstances. So like, I did it, but I wasn't
thinking straight. Yeah, or I was forced to do it.
The insanity defense falls under this.
Definitely. If someone's legally insane,
they might not be held responsible.
But that's a tough one to prove, Frank.
Oh yeah, very difficult. Lots of legal hurdles.
What other excuse defenses are there?
Duress is a common one. Duress.
Like you're forced to commit a crime under threat of harm.
So you're saying you didn't have a real choice?
Exactly like someone being forced to rob a bank because
their families held hostage. OK, duress.
Got it. Any others?
Intoxication can sometimes be a defense.
Like if you're drunk or high. Well, voluntary intoxication is
rarely a good defense. Meaning you chose to get that
way. Right, but involuntary
intoxication might be different. Like if you were drugged without
knowing it. Yeah, that could potentially
negate the men's Rea. So you couldn't form the intent
to commit the crime. Exactly, but it's very fact
specific. OK, intoxication.
Use with caution. Good advice.
Are there any other types of defenses?
Yeah, we should mention procedural defenses.
Procedural. What are those?
These focus on whether the case was handled properly.
So not about guilt or innocence, but about procedure.
Exactly like entrapment. Entrapment.
That's where law enforcement induces someone to commit a
crime. So they're basically creating
criminals, not catching them. Yeah, like an undercover officer
pressuring someone to buy drugs. OK, entrapment makes sense.
Any other procedural ones? Double jeopardy is a big 1A. 5th
amendment thing, right? Yep.
Can't be tried twice for the same crime.
So once you're acquitted, you're free and clear.
Well, there are some exceptions, but generally yes.
OK. Procedural defenses.
Got it. So we've got justifications,
excuses, procedural. Lots of ways to challenge a
criminal charge. It's all part of ensuring a fair
trial, a just outcome. Speaking of outcomes, what about
sentencing? The final stage, right where the
rubber meets the road. This is where we see the real
consequences of a conviction. Exactly, and it's a complex
area. Lots of factors to consider.
So how does sentencing work? What are the goals?
Well, there are some guiding principles, although they're not
always strictly followed. Like proportionality.
The punishment should fit the crime.
Makes sense. A minor offense shouldn't lead
to a major sentence. Right.
And consistency. Similar crimes should get
similar sentences. So no one's getting special
treatment. Exactly.
It's about fairness and predictability.
OK, what else? Individualization is important
too. Meaning the judge considers the
specific offender and their circumstances.
Yeah, their criminal history, remorse, any mitigating factors.
So it's not just A1 size fits all.
Approach. Nope.
Each case is unique. OK.
And what about rehabilitation? That's a big one, too, the focus
on reforming the offender. So not just punishment, but
trying to help them change their behavior.
Exactly. Things like drug treatment, job
training, counseling. To reduce the chances of them
reoffending. That's the goal.
OK, so we've got principles. Now, what about the actual types
of sentences? Well, fines are common for less
serious offenses. Just paying paying a monetary
penalty. Right, and probation is often
used as an alternative to incarceration.
So you stay in the community, but under supervision.
Yeah, with certain conditions like check insurance, drug
tests, counseling. And if you violate those
conditions? You could end up in jail or
prison. Right, imprisonment.
That's the big one. Loss of liberty, definitely the
most serious punishment. How do they decide how long
someone goes to prison for? There are sentencing guidelines,
but judges have some discretion. Based on the crime, the
offenders history, all that. Exactly.
It's a complex process. OK, fines, probation,
imprisonment, those are the main ones.
Yeah, but there are also community based sanctions.
Oh yeah, what are those? Things like community service,
restitution to the victim. So more focused on repairing the
harm and reintegrating the offender.
That's the idea. Wow, we've covered a lot today.
We have criminal laws, big field.
But I feel like I understand it so much better now.
That's great to hear. Remember, it's about applying
these concepts to real cases. And thinking critically, right?
Absolutely. The law is more than just
memorizing rules. It's about understanding the
why, the reasoning behind it all.
Exactly, and using that knowledge to advocate for your
clients. OK, I'm feeling much more
prepared for the bar exam now. Good luck with your studies,
it's a challenging journey but a rewarding 1.
Thanks for all your insights, it's been really helpful.
You're welcome, always glad to talk criminal law.
Well, that's it for our deep dive into criminal law.
Hope you all learned something. Remember, this is just the
beginning. Keep.
Practicing keep. Learning and you'll ace that
exam. Good luck everyone.
Thanks for listening.