Notes Murder is the killing with malice aforethought Establish malice aforethought you can have second degree

murder. Intentional Killings: Second Degree Intent to Kill Did not Intend to Kill anyone, but are murders because they have the requisite mens rea. Intent to Seriously Injure Felony Murder Rule Depraved Heart First Degree Murder Add Premeditation or deliberated Mandated by Statute Specified Felonies Go Down from Second Degree Murder 1. Mitigation in the guilt phase. Provoked killing as provided under common law a. Reasonable standard - Modern Jurisdiction b. Killing provoked - Heat of Passion c. Model Penal Code i.Subjective understanding of the defendant. Was it reasonable for defendant to be provoked enough. 2. Imperfect Self-Defense 3. Diminished Capacity Depraved Heart Knoller: Thomas and Phillips Test Pg. 362 There was a conscious disregard for human life for the uses of the dogs. The case was one of first impression. DUI cases charged as second-degree murder. There is a separation of power problems. The prosecutor enforces the law, and the judiciary interprets the law. Was the jury instructed on the law correctly. Ms. Knoller was not the most culpable it was her husband. The husband wasnt even there that is the distinction the dogs had no muzzle. Knoller is interesting because it went to the grand jury. Had a view of knoller. A prosecutor can reject the grand jury.

Grand Jury was originally given to hold the prosecutor back. Difference between mens rea of Depraved Heart and Involuntary Murder. The risk of human was not death but it was harm. As the level of risk that was encountered. Involuntary manslaughter look at a lower level of mens rea. Where the risk of harm is lower. September 29, 2011 Issue: Whether under the totality of the circumstances Dr. Murray was criminally negligent for administering the dosage of anesthesia. Actus Rea: There was a volitional act Mens Rea: Legal Duty Causation - Caused Michaels death. Defense: Injected himself with the fatal dose. Took some additional pills. Willful blindness applies when the requisite knowledge is met. Model Penal Code Prove knowledge on part of Dr. Murray. Model Penal Code Pg. 988) Purposely Knowingly Recklessly Negligently Charging Dr. Murray with depraved heart murder. Depraved Heart Murder Mens Rea: Reckless disregard for human life Involuntary Mens Reas: Reckless disregard for injury to another individual. Criminal Negligence Reckless and Wanton Standard

As a medical doctor. Dr. Murray is in a bad spot. A doctor should know about the treatment of the individual. Example of Prosecutorial Restraint - Knoller Dog Bit Death Could have gone for higher charge. DEFENSES Self-Defense: Elements: Honestly and Reasonably believed Threatening with an imminent threat of unlawful force, and The force he or she used was both necessary to repel the threat and proportionate to the threate Defendant must not have been the initial agressor. Proportionality What the defendant reasonably perceived to be the deadly force to be the factor. Distinctly when you are wrong (mistakenly killed someone who was threatening you put really wasnt Self Defense theory still applies Defendant Acted in legitimate self-defense Factors Reputation Victims Reputation if Defendant knows about it

Goetz: certain things of individuals to perceive a higher level of threats. Objective standard but taking into account unique factors. Reatreat Duty to Retreat Initial Agressor Taking in the totality of circumstances just as you do in the heat of passion defense. Assailants particular characteristics Assailant's perceived dangers Reasonable Assess threat as deadly

Serious Bodily Harm, connected to Threate of substantial bodily harm can trigger deadly force? enumerated felony there is some type of inherent danger. Self Defense There must be a proprotionality between the forces that is between the agressor and the defender. The response must be proportionate Reputation for violent Threat deadly or for serious injury Serious bodily injury to trigger the self-defnese Under an objective analysis, you want a reasonable assessment of the imminence, necessity, and proportionatlity Hypo 10. 1 State v. Simon Taking into account the subjective view of the defendant instead of the objective standard. There may be similar results. If the basis works. Can look at the size of the individual for the reasonableness standard. Hypo 10.2 Initial Agressor Escalation of Threat - Jail. Level of threat can change throughout the fight. Dont have to be deadly but it may change. As long as assessment is reasonable. Battered Woman Syndrome It is truly an imminent threat or a preemptive strike. If it is preemptive response which means that there was no imminence. State v. Stewart - Battered Wife Syndrome History - Reasonable belief on Legal right to self-defense Ongoing threat or abuse. Monetary Lull Questions 5 2.1 Student 1, Battered Spouse response quicker. Subjective View.

Questions 2.3 Can use some facts to built on the battered woman syndrome. How does BS syndrome help to apply self-defense. Category of post traumatic stress. Reasonable to act. Introduction of social science evidence through expert testimony. Battered Spouse can assess threat as imminent. Objective legal standard. Reasonable to assess threat as reasonable. The only option would be that she is lying in wait. New facts saying that there is a lull in the threat. Distinction between imminent threat Simple nap - Lull Legal options - More - Maybe not a lull Justified killing is a narrow category, because there is an area of legal self-help. Volatile domestic violent situation. Legal prospective went to justify the spouse who is in lying and wait. Some jurisdictions have dealt with it by statute. California - Battered Women Syndrome Battery Statute accomodate violence

Cycle of Violence Unlikely it will stop in itself. Codified Domestic Violence very broad Defense of property - Most jurisdictions say that it cannot be letah Defense of Habitation Come into their property Legitimate right to self-defense. Defenses Justification in a defense. Have a legal right to act the way that you did. Issue in self-defense is proportionality. The act is proportionate to the threat. There is an overlay of reasonableness. Objective Standpoint

Totality of Circumstances involved

Initial Agressor. (Not entitled to self-defense) Victim of Agression: Stand your ground No Duty to Retreat. Actions were legally justified. Should result in criminal liability Video - Mr. Horn not in imminent threat. Leeway to defense others, but is that waht Mr. Horn is doing. 9/11 call. Self Defese at the home - Self Defense - Imminence Defense of Habitation People v. Brown Variation in self-defense laws. Force entry Pg. 637 Elemetns Unlawful and forcible entry into a residence; The entry must be by someone who is not a member of the family or the household. The residential occupant must have used deadly force against the victim within the residence; and The residential occupant must have had knowledge of the unlawful and forcible entry. Castle Doctrine -Once within the home. Grand Jury - Assess whether there is probable cause. (Determine whether there is probable cause.) Usually criminal complaint. Information is filed. Grand Jury - Need to know what the public will say because they need to prove it to 12 people of the same public. The case may not make it under the burden of the trial. Prosecutors are not bound by the decisions. There is still prosecutorial discretion Judges cannot force them. There are political aspects to it. Dont know what facts jurors are relying on. There is jury nullification. Defense of Property Generally not allowed Defense of person separate from defense of property

Insanity Plea Very difficult defense Completely challenging Insanity different from heat of passion and provocation. law doesnt recognize human frailty Individual is less culpable if reasonable person is provoked. Lower level of culpability. Involuntary Manslaughter Insanity Not send them to Jail Two Types Insane at time of crime (Basis of Class) Insane at time of trial (Prevents trial from going forward) Mens Rea (Criminal Mind) Insane? MNaughter Rule pg. 699. Disease of the mind. Recognized mental illness. Main elements about defendant. 1. Nature and Quality of the Act. Appreciate a. Whether it is morally wrong 2. Irresistible impulse - Minority view 3. Model Penal Code Irresistible Impulse Criminal liability Whether defendant had control to conform itself to the requirement of the law Medical support with expert testimony. Loophole? - Presumption a. Criminal but presumed sane. Need to establish that you are not sane b. Burden on defendant by the preponderance of evdience.