Crim Law Outline
i. Actus Reus - evil act 1. Defendant must have done something wrong 2. Cannot be convicted of a thought crime a. A statute that punishes a person for renting a place with the intention of or for the purpose of selling liquor is invalid because it does not require a wrongful act. Proctor. 3. Can include omission, not just commission a. An omission constitutes actus Reus of a crime when the person had a duty to act but did not 4.- Duty to Act -- 4 ways a duty can arise a. Statute b. Status (familial) C. Contract d. Voluntary assumption of care + selection + helplessness i. Def. was originally convicted of involuntary manslaughter after a child left to her care died as a result of neglect. Jones. (was reversed because no jury instruction on legal duty as an element) ii. Legality Principles 1. Legislatively a. A criminal act must be defined by the legislature, not judges (common law is judge made laws) b. There can be no common law crimes i. Ex-husband struck pregnant wife killing fetus. Argued couldn't be convicted because a fetus is not a viable human being. Though original law did not intend/include fetuses, now they should. But court would be created its own law. Keeler. ii. Newspaper printed story about president bribing Bonaparte. Congress did not create libel offense. No conviction because Congress can't create common law on its own. Federal Court is granted that power. Hudson and Goodwin. 2. Prospectively a. A crime can only punish future conduct b. A law cannot be made that punishes a "crime" after it was already committed c. A law that punishes conduct after the fact is known is known as an "ex post facto" offense and is unconstitutional i. Because if lawmakers can create crimes after they were committed, people would not be on notice 1. Keeler case, he wasn't on notice that a fetus at 8 months is considered a viable human 3. Publicity a. The crime must be published, no "secret crimes" i. It's unfair to punish someone for conduct they didn't know was criminal 4. Generality -- must apply to everyone, no bills of attainder a. Bill of attainder is a law that applies to one specific person or group 5. Specificity -- a law must be specific a."void for vagueness" the claim that a law is unconstitutionally vague i. Crime rate high in Chicago. Statute passed to create a statute specific to this. Elements were (1) loitering for no apparent purpose, (2) dispersal order, (3) police must believe the loiters are members of a gang. Unconstitutional because "for no apparent purpose' is too vague. Chicago v. Morales. ii. Vagueness test -- an ordinary person would not understand what is covered (fair notice) and no minimal guidance to govern law enforce (risk of arbitrary and discriminatory application)
ii. More Vagueness cases -- Desertrain with homelessness "living quarters", Papachristou with vagrancy law "rogue" and "loafers" (punishes status too) iii. Involunta