zeth006 wrote:XxSpyKEx wrote:screwsandboalts wrote:hey guys - I'm putting together my outline for Crim and we are using Dressler's casebook. I've looked at most of the supplements but i'm really just looking for a quick checklist to make sure I didn't forget any relevant "issues" to each section - I'm not looking for a long, explanatory type thing - I have my notes etc, so I can fill in the blanks/whatever I missed.
Does anybody have a dressler checklist/attack outline that they would be willing to share with me? pleaaaseee
Your attack outline shouldn't be based on what dressler says (even though your using his casebook), unless dressler is also your prof and he just so happened to teach the course exactly like what's in his supplement (unlikely). Your checklist/attack outline should be based on things that were emphasized in your class and that your prof talked about. No one that wasn't in your class can do this for you. In all reality, this takes maybe 2 hours to make an attack outline, so stop being lazy.
Damn. Any chance someone could upload or post a screen shot of their checklist? I've never seen one.
Below is my attack outline from when I took crim (this is probably completely useless to anyone except me since this was my way of condensing my main 150 page outline, which contained a lot of the MPC in it's entirety, and then broken down by sentences or important phrases followed by blurbs of what each sentence or phrase meant based on my notes of what the prof said it meant (and things I picked up going through dresslers, the E&E, etc), and cross-references to other sections of the MPC that it correlated with, etc.)
Crim law short outline
1) Theories of punishment
a) Civil confinement rule
b) This is present in practically every single thing below
2) Proportionality
3) Sentencing
a) 6.06—KNOW THIS
b) Rule- anything facts, that increases sentence jury
4) The elements of a crime
5) The ACT requirement
a) 7-8 requirements of an act
b) Conduct <
c) Must be voluntary <
i) 2.01 requirement of an act
ii) Transferred voluntariness
d) Omissions
e) Possessions
i) Few things here (e.g. constructive possession)
f) Requirement of harm
g) Status crimes <
h) Advance notice of crime
i) Specificity
6) Mental states <
a) Must tie w/ respect to X material element
b) CL
c) MPC 2.02
i) If no mental state proscribed (3 possibilities)
d) Strict liability 2.05
i) 2-3 basic requirements
ii) 4 rationales <
7) Concurrence
Mens rea and mistake
a) CL
i) Mistake of fact
ii) Mistake of law (remember exception w/ moving mental state on statute)
b) MPC 2.04
i) Rule-
(1) Negates any material element
ii) Exceptions (statute + 2 exceptions)
iii) Defense not available if guilty of other offense if facts as you supposed be…
c) Relation to impossibility (attempt)
9) Capacity for mens rea
a) Intoxication (CL/MPC)
i) State’s can say intoxication can’t negate
10) Causation (only homicide)
a) CL
i) But-for
(1) Multiple actors
ii) Proximate (2 rules)
(1) Intervening causes
(a) Mental irresponsibility/ 3rd party must be gross negligence
(i) Chain of causation broke if V” actions are at V’ volition
b) MPC 2.03 (note- only language for (a))
c) Omissions
11) Burglary (MPC)
12) Rape
a) CL
i) Sexual fraud
b) MPC 213.1
i) No sexual fraud
ii) Age provision 213.6
13) MURDER
a) Remember need act, causation & result!!
b) Mens rea w/ respect to death
c) 5 reason break this up like we do <
d) CL
i) Intentional homicide
(1) Can introduce evidence that you lacked mental state
(a) (e.g. mental disorder that prevents being capable of forming intent)
(2) Intentional (2nd degree)
(a) Transferred intent (CL)
(3) Premeditated (1st degree)
(a) Planned murder (while 1st degree-unplanned/impulsive)
(i) [Knowledge/purpose distinction]
(b) Rule
(i) 7 circumstances to infer from
(4) Voluntary manslaughter
(a) Provocation—totally objective test (no looking at mental states)
(b) Heat of passion- just needs for RP enough to lose temper (not kill)
(c) Cooled off- no cultural defense
ii) Unintentional homicide
(1) Involuntary manslaughter
(2) Reckless murder
(3) Felony murder
(a) Argue this, but also other forms of homicide
(b) 1st degree/2nd degree distinction
(c) 4 rationales
(d) Limits
(i) Merger
1. Crimes that merge
(ii) Dangerous felony
1. Abstract
a. Highly likely to… = abandoned or malignant
b. Other formulations (substantial risk of…)
2. Facts
(iii) Options w/ rule
(4) Misdemeanor murder – still need causation
e) MPC 210.2-.4
i) Murder
(1) Knowing & purpose
(2) Reckless indifference
(a) Can’t negate reckless w/ intoxication
ii) Manslaughter
(1) Reckless
(a) Can’t negate reckless w/ intoxication
(2) EMED
(a) Reasonable expl… based on D’s psychological characteristics
(b) Cultural defense
(c) Doesn’t matter who you kill
iii) Negligent
(1) 3rd degree (less then manslaughter)
14) Death penalty
a) CL
i) 7 major points (p. 81)
ii) 3 categorical limits
b) MPC 210.6
i) NO DP if: 6 points
ii) 8 aggravating circumstances
iii) 8 mitigating
iv) Need 2 separate trials, one for DP
15) Defenses
a) Self defense <
i) CL- Rule
(1) 4 parts & BWS fits in
(a) Reasonable belief
(i) No imperfect SD (“reasonably believes”)
(ii) RP under circumstances includes…
ii) MPC 3.02
(1) Deadly force only allowed to protect against death, serious…, kidnapping, rape
(2) Reckless/negligent provision
(a) Imperfect SD (mitigates to manslaughter/negligent homicide)
(3) Property defense 3.06(3)D
b) Necessity <
i) CL
(1) No homicide
(2) Political/prison necessity
ii) MPC
(1) “Actor believes to be necessary”
(2) Can use in homicide
(3) Reckless/negligent in putting self in position…
(4) 4 distinctions from SD
c) Duress <
i) Must be response to human threat
ii) CL
(1) No homicide (but FM may use this defense)
iii) MPC 2.09
(1) Reasonable firmness in actors situation
(2) If reckless NO DEFENSE
iv) CL v. MPC chart (5 points)
(1) MPC- Doesn’t have to be deadly force, as long as person w/ reasonable firmness…
(2) MPC- any crime
d) Intoxication 2.08
e) Insanity <
i) M’Naughten
ii) MPC 4.01
(1) Mental disease is not…
(2) 4.04- procedural hurdle (4 other hurdles here)
iii) Guilty but mentally ill
16) Inchoate crimes
a) Note- if you solicit, can possibly get solicitation, attempt, or conspiracy
i) NOTE- solicitation of innocent agent is attempt substantial step
b) Solicitation
i) MPC 5.02
(1) Rule
(a) Purpose
(2) Uncommunicated solicitation
(3) Renunciation
ii) 5.04
iii) 5.05 (grading/inherently unlikely/no multiple inchoates)
iv) 1.07B
v) 3 solicitation problems
(1) Solicitation is the crime—doesn’t matter when, or if ever takes place
c) Conspiracy
i) MPC full 5.03
(1) Purpose- conduct/result
(2) #1- rule
(a) Really fact specific to show there was agreement
(b) #5- Overt Act in furtherance…
(i) Doesn’t have to be illegal
(ii) Only one person needs to do it
(3) #2- Identity of others issues
(4) #3- Multiple objects to conspiracy
(5) #6- Renunciation
(6) #7- duration (3 points here)
(7) 5.04/5.05/1.07B
(a) Exception to 1.07B
ii) Nature of conspiracy (CL/MPC)
(1) Definition- CL/MPC
(2) 3 reason why have conspiracy
(3) Penalty
(4) Conspiracy require crime?
(a) CL/Federal law/MPC
(b) MPC takes limited view on conspiracy (4 requirements)
(5) Convictions of multiple in inchoates?
(a) Inchoate + completed?
(b) CL- blockburger
iii) Agreement
(1) Principal needs to know of aid here, unlike complicity
(2) Proving agreement (coordinated … must be planned)
(3) Feigned agreement
(a) If you agree doesn’t matter if conspiracy exists anymore & 5.04
(4) Withdrawal from conspiracy
iv) Renunciation
(1) Compare renunciations
v) Mens rea of conspiracy
(1) CL
(a) Supplying goods knowledge+
(2) MPC
(a) Purpose to conduct- really fact intensive
(b) Federal attendant circumstance = underlying crime culpability
(3) No reckless/negligent conspiracy crime toward result (MPC & CL)
vi) Incidents of conspiracy
(1) Pinkerton rule
(a) Only holds Ds liable going forward
(b) MPC- rejects. Only liable for what you agree to (need accomplice liability)
(2) 4 procedural advantages of conspirarcy
(3) MPC uses unilateral conspiracy
(a) Solicitation v. conspiracy
(4) Wharton’s rule
(a) MPC doesn’t need it (1.07(1)B)
vii) RICO
(1) Elements
(a) Pattern (near-simultaneous but distinct acts enough)
(2) How to violate
(a) 1962D-
(i) D doesn’t have to commit 2 crimes, just participate and other do acts
(ii) Doesn’t require agreement—know and facilitate the 2 predicate acts sufficient
(iii) Add pinkerton
(3) Don’t need to be able to infer knowledge of other participants in enterprise
d) Attempt
i) MPC 5.01
(1) 5.05/ 1.07B
(2) Attendant circumstances = underlying crime culpability
(3) 7 substantial steps
(a) 2G- soliciting innocent agent
ii) Why punish Qs <
iii) Compared to other crimes
(1) FM/ Attempted murder (no reckless/negligent attempt)/ Voluntary manslaughter / Conduct crimes (reckless endangerment fits here)
iv) Mens rea for attempt
(1) CL & MPC
(a) No reckless/negligent attempt (in MPC must know result will occur)
(i) No attempted 2nd FM, depraved heart, etc.
(b) Reckless endangerment
v) MPC ACT Requirement
(1) CL- 5 tests
(2) MPC- substantial step
vi) MPC v. CL Chart
vii) Grading (MPC & CL)
viii) Defenses to attempt:
(1) Abandonment
(a) Must cross line of substantial step first
(2) Impossibility
(a) CL- (tests)
(b) Symmetry between attempt impossibility and mistakes of fact/law
(c) MPC
(i) Only true legal impossibility
e) Complicity
i) NOT A CRIME!
(1) ACT + MENS REA = morph into principal
ii) MPC 2.06
(1) #1- legally accountable
(2) #2- underlying culpability + causes innocent or irresponsible …
(3) #3- 3 rules
(a) Omissions- cops
(4) #4- result
(a) So 2 prong test
(5) #5- legally incapable people
(6) #6- Defenses
(a) Victim
(b) Inevitably incident
(c) Renunciation
(7) #7- don’t need conviction of principal
(8) Act
(a) But-for causation not important (doesn’t matter if assistance not necessary),
(i) Must make it easier for…
(9) Mens rea
(a) Purpose- conduct
(b) Underlying crime- result
(10) Relation of the parties
(a) Rule- don’t care about anyone’s head
(11) Renunciation
iii) CL v. MPC grid
(1) CL- purpose to everything + principal underlying requirements
iv) CL- Accessorial ACT
(1) Rule
(2) Attempted complicity (typically rejected in CL)
v) CL- Mens rea of complicity
(1) Faking police status cases
(a) Requires criminal shared requisite intent with accomplice
(2) No Reckless/negligent homicide
(3) Facilitation laws & Duel crime cases
The following was in a box in the corner of my first page in bold and certain parts highlighted (basically so I remember to walk through the elements of a crime defenses in chronological order).
ELEMENTS OF A CRIME:
1) Voluntary ACT (or omission- rare)
2) Mental state
a) Argue- lacked capacity to form
3) CAUSATION (only for crime w/ result)—Homicide
a) But for
b) Proximate
4) RESULT –
5) Defenses
a) SD
i) Alternative- EMED
b) NECESSITY
6) Inchoate crimes
a) Conspiracy- OVERT ACT
b) RENUNCIATION/ABANDONMENT
c) 1.07 (no completed offense + inchoate)
i) CL- blockburger