MPC Requirements: Requirements: Attempt requires (p.1219) - same mens rea as actual crime purposely do something that is considered a “substantial step” towards completing crime & corroborates to criminal act (jury will weigh in on this) Defense: Abandonment (has to be voluntary; not because crime is too difficult so gives up)
Murder requires (p.1232): - must kill person with purpose, knowledge(practically certain) or extreme indifference of human life (permissive presumption ---presumed if is in flight fli ght from enumerated crime of: rape; robbery; deviate sexual intercourse) look at each mental state one by one Defenses: necessity (chose between lesser of 2 evils—can’t evils—can’t use if person was reckless from start); mitigation to manslaughter b/c of EED; self defense Manslaughter requires: - need to kill recklessly or under EED
Felony Murder( no actual statute): MPC takes restricted approach —specific enumerated felonies apply (rape; robbery; deviate sexual intercourse)— intercourse)—rebuttable presumption of extreme indifference(recklessnesss default rule) indifference(recklessnes o attempted murder- not included in enumerated felonies so no FM o an assault with a deadly weapon that leads to death will usually not be considered felony murder MPC doesn’t allow merger limitation b/c it only allows felony murder liablility in restricted times- the enumerated felonies Rape requires: male has actual sex with female (if no actual sex then it will be attempted rape) not the man’s wife force or threat of force o no mens rea so default is recklessness o if male has sex with another male— male—not rape Attempted rape requires (attempt pg.1219): same mens rea as rape but look at elements of attempt! Defense: impossibility (legal impossibility)— impossibility)—if married then it cannot legally be rape - mistake of fact defense of rape???
Accomplice liability: can have attempt accessory after the fact in MPC -
MPC only attaches liability to accomplice if crime is actually foreseen (actually contemplated by the perpetrator)— perpetrator)—not enough for it to be simple foreseeable
CAN YOU ANSWER THIS?
P (principle) commits a crime and A (accomplice) helps him in some way. If P completes the crime, but P has a defense (let’s say insanity), can A still be liable for the crime as an accomplice? --- This is what it said online but it doesn't really answer anything
It depends on the jurisdiction’s view of the source of accomplice liability. Common Law: accomplice liability derives from the principal’s liability (extended to those who assist); Modern Law: accomplice liability is personal to the accomplice (doesn’t depend on the principal’s liability