Key Criminal Law Concepts: Actus Reus, Mens Rea & More
Key Criminal Law Concepts
Actus reus: The physical act of the crime.
Mens rea: The mental intent to commit the crime.
Transferred Intent: In both criminal and tort (civil wrong) law, transferred intent occurs when an intent to cause harm to one person results in harm to another person instead of the intended target. The law transfers the intent to the actual harm.
Criminal Negligence (Crim Neg): Recklessly acting without reasonable caution, putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to act with the same consequences).
Recklessness: In criminal law and tort law, recklessness is the state of mind where a person deliberately and unjustifiably pursues a course of action while consciously disregarding the risks involved.
Omission: Failure to perform an act when a duty of performance is imposed by law.
Strict Liability (SL): Culpability without fault or intention. SL offenses do not require mens rea but do require actus reus.
- No guilt without actus reus (no voluntary act).
- With SL, a defendant can be convicted based only on actus reus.
- SL is also used in regulatory offenses (RO) affecting public health and welfare. Mens rea is often too hard to prove in RO.
Concurrence of Actus Reus & Mens Rea: Must occur concurrently (at the same time), e.g., intent to murder.
Example: If “A” intentionally kills “B”, but not guilty of intentional murder.
Intoxication: Intoxication is generally not a defense to a criminal charge. However, in any prosecution for an offense, evidence of the defendant’s intoxication may be offered if it is relevant to negate an element of the crime charged.
Mistake of Fact: A person is not relieved of criminal liability because they engaged in conduct under a mistaken belief of fact unless that factual mistake negates the culpable mental state.
- Must be honest, reasonable, and negate the mens rea for the offense.
Mistake of Law (“Ignorance of the law is no excuse”): Rarely works as a defense unless it negates mens rea.
In NYS, it works as a defense only if the defendant relies on an official statement by someone charged with enforcing the law.
Causation (Two Parts):
Factual Causation (Cause-in-fact):
The injury would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s conduct. There must be a link between the defendant’s conduct and the result.
Proximate (Legal) Causation:
To hold the defendant culpable, the result must be reasonably foreseeable or related to the defendant’s conduct. It must not be too remote, intervening, or superseding.
Accomplice Liability: Whether a defendant is a principal or accomplice is irrelevant in determining culpability. Most states (including NYS) have abolished the four common law categories.
Principals and Accomplices are equally culpable. Examples: lookout, driving getaway car.
Principals and Accomplices share mens rea (mental culpability) = Accomplice Liability.
An innocent agent is not an Accomplice because there is no shared mens rea. Example: A defendant who delivers a suitcase with drugs is not guilty if unaware the suitcase contained drugs.
PL 20.05 Degrees of Offense: When an offense is divided into degrees, look at the actus reus of the principal and the mens rea of each participant.
Natural & Probable Consequences for Aggravating Factors: A defendant is culpable for any reasonably foreseeable offense committed by a co-defendant.
Example: A defendant is culpable for murder if they cause the death of someone who is a non-participant in the crime if the defendant is committing/attempting a dangerous felony (Felony-Murder rule).
CPL 60.22 Accomplice Corroboration: The corroboration rule means that a criminal conviction cannot be based upon the confession of a criminal defendant alone. A conviction may not rest only on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
CPL 60.50 “Corpus Delecti” (Body of Crime):
- A defendant’s statement alone isn’t enough to convict.
- Independent proof that a crime was committed is needed.
Pinkerton Doctrine: A defendant in a Conspiracy case is culpable for any crime committed by a Co-Conspirator if the crime was within the scope of the conspiracy and a natural foreseeable result of the conspiracy.
Example: In a Federal case of Conspiracy to commit Bank Robbery, a defendant who only cased the bank would also be culpable for grand larceny of the getaway car and felony-murder of the bank guard.
- In NYS, the defendant would most likely only be guilty of the Conspiracy and possibly the robbery. The defendant is not as likely to be culpable for the Grand Larceny and Felony-Murder.
- Federal courts follow Pinkerton.
- NYS and most states do not.
- In NYS, a Co-Conspirator is not automatically an Accomplice.
- Federal courts have extended culpability for Conspiracy since they prosecute more large-scale conspiracy cases.