Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
goosey
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:48 pm

Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby goosey » Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:28 pm

What are the differences between the actus reus requirement for the common law v the model penal code?

I am outlining and realized I took HORRIBLE class notes on this...I took pretty thorough notes from Dressler's Understanding Crim Law, but its a little confusing because I can't tell when hes talking about the common law specifically, though he puts headers for the MPC

User avatar
LAWYER2
Posts: 576
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 9:15 pm

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby LAWYER2 » Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:39 pm

I believe common law still uses strict liability while the MPC rejects it..............or is that the Mens Rea portion :(

User avatar
goosey
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:48 pm

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby goosey » Sat Sep 25, 2010 4:09 pm

LAWYER2 wrote:I believe common law still uses strict liability while the MPC rejects it..............or is that the Mens Rea portion :(


2.05 of MPC is about strict liability, which it says can apply to either actus reus or mens rea, but for some reason we never went over it in respect to actus reus in class

User avatar
bgdddymtty
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby bgdddymtty » Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:43 pm

There's no difference in actus reus requirements. No matter the offense, you must have actually committed the act proscribed by the statute in order to be found guilty of the offense. If you haven't, you're not guilty, period. If you have, then the State must prove that you did so with the required mens rea, and that's where differences between the common law and the MPC come into play.

EDIT: Since a section-mate just passed this along, I'll pay it forward: Common Law vs. MPC Differences (LinkRemoved)

User avatar
goosey
Posts: 1543
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:48 pm

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby goosey » Sat Sep 25, 2010 6:01 pm

bgdddymtty wrote:There's no difference in actus reus requirements. No matter the offense, you must have actually committed the act proscribed by the statute in order to be found guilty of the offense. If you haven't, you're not guilty, period. If you have, then the State must prove that you did so with the required mens rea, and that's where differences between the common law and the MPC come into play.

EDIT: Since a section-mate just passed this along, I'll pay it forward: Common Law vs. MPC Differences (LinkRemoved)



OMG i was going to make this on wednesday!!! THANK YOU. you just saved me an hour.

Debating whether or not I should still make it though..it may help me learn. But I can use that as a backup to double check. awesome!

User avatar
zeth006
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:54 am

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby zeth006 » Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:30 am

bgdddymtty wrote:There's no difference in actus reus requirements. No matter the offense, you must have actually committed the act proscribed by the statute in order to be found guilty of the offense. If you haven't, you're not guilty, period. If you have, then the State must prove that you did so with the required mens rea, and that's where differences between the common law and the MPC come into play.

EDIT: Since a section-mate just passed this along, I'll pay it forward: Common Law vs. MPC Differences (LinkRemoved)


OMG.

If you and/or your sectionmate could do it for homicide, that would be fucking awesome.

User avatar
bgdddymtty
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby bgdddymtty » Sun Sep 26, 2010 1:22 am

zeth006 wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:There's no difference in actus reus requirements. No matter the offense, you must have actually committed the act proscribed by the statute in order to be found guilty of the offense. If you haven't, you're not guilty, period. If you have, then the State must prove that you did so with the required mens rea, and that's where differences between the common law and the MPC come into play.

EDIT: Since a section-mate just passed this along, I'll pay it forward: Common Law vs. MPC Differences (LinkRemoved)


OMG.

If you and/or your sectionmate could do it for homicide, that would be fucking awesome.
She didn't make the chart; she just found it. The interwebs are a wonderland. I'm guessing there's something similar for homicide out there somewhere.

User avatar
zeth006
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:54 am

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby zeth006 » Sun Sep 26, 2010 4:10 am

bgdddymtty wrote:
zeth006 wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:There's no difference in actus reus requirements. No matter the offense, you must have actually committed the act proscribed by the statute in order to be found guilty of the offense. If you haven't, you're not guilty, period. If you have, then the State must prove that you did so with the required mens rea, and that's where differences between the common law and the MPC come into play.

EDIT: Since a section-mate just passed this along, I'll pay it forward: Common Law vs. MPC Differences (LinkRemoved)


OMG.

If you and/or your sectionmate could do it for homicide, that would be fucking awesome.
She didn't make the chart; she just found it. The interwebs are a wonderland. I'm guessing there's something similar for homicide out there somewhere.


Cool

fjk88
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 12:50 pm

Re: Crim Law Question: Actus Reus Common Law v MPC

Postby fjk88 » Sun Sep 26, 2010 8:40 pm

zeth006 wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:There's no difference in actus reus requirements. No matter the offense, you must have actually committed the act proscribed by the statute in order to be found guilty of the offense. If you haven't, you're not guilty, period. If you have, then the State must prove that you did so with the required mens rea, and that's where differences between the common law and the MPC come into play.

EDIT: Since a section-mate just passed this along, I'll pay it forward: Common Law vs. MPC Differences (LinkRemoved)


OMG.

If you and/or your sectionmate could do it for homicide, that would be fucking awesome.


go to page 7 of that document...




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jbagelboy and 6 guests