Crime Actus Reus May Be The Most Essay

PAGES
4
WORDS
1352
Cite

¶ … Crime Actus Reus may be the most essential element involved in deciding what exactly makes up a crime. Most commonly defined as a voluntary act or an omission of an act, actus reus is one of the most objective elements in determining whether a crime has been committed since its result ( typically some form of injury to another or a group of people) is what largely comprises criminal activity. To fully understand the scope of actus reus, deliberate attention must be given to what exactly constitutes an act, or a criminal omission of an act.

In order for an actus reus to be linked to a crime it must be voluntary, meaning the accused must be aware of what is being done. An act can be any type of voluntary human behavior, and generally takes the form of some sort of physical movement which a person is conscious of. With such a widespread definition, there are limited circumstances in which an act may be deemed involuntary. Movements produced by muscles spasms are involuntary, as well as those made during a sleep-induced state or when a person is unconscious, which generally includes human behavior under the influence of hypnosis. Unless a body movement is made by a willful, determined effort from the actor, it cannot be considered a form of actus reus for criminal intentions. Interestingly, possession (of illegal material) is considered a voluntary act in the United States.

Omission of an act may also be included as part of actus reus, particularly when the negligence of an action results in injury to another. Criminal omission is largely determined by the "but for" principle, which states that a crime would not have taken place but for an act of omission. Certain laws explicitly state that omission of them constitutes a crime in their statutes, while failure to perform particular acts (which cause harm as a result of that failure) may also constitute an actus reus by omission.

Mens rea can be considered the psychological component of actus reus. While...

...

Although concurrence and casualty are important elements in labeling an act criminal or not, an actus reus combined with a mens rea -- meaning an established intent to injure or transgress law -- can typically determine an act of crime.
However, the severity of a crime and its culpability for the offender vary in terms of mens rea, which generally can be classified into four different categories. These stratifications not only factor into whether or not an act may be deemed criminal, but also play an import role in assessing punitive measures equitable to an infraction. The first type of mens rea is usually referred to as general intent. General intent is the most fundamental form of mens rea, which only requires the acussed to commit a crime. Premeditation or deliberately attempting to transgress law is not relevant to general intent, which only means the accused broke a law.

Specific intent is the form of mens rea that establishes that the accused was aware that his or her infraction was illegal. Specific intent is possibly one of the most severe forms of mens rea since it strongly indicates a willingness to commit crime. Its austerity is somewhat tempered by the more encompassing mens rea variety known as recklessness, which is used to describe a crime in which no regard was given to others in terms of the outcome of the action. Willful blindness bears some similarity to specific intent in establishing that a crime was willingly committed. It is the form of mens rea that declares the accused purposefully ignored the potential criminality of his or her act, so as not to know the result.

The concurrence element of a crime merely assists in establishing the timing of the mens rea in relation to the actus reus. In most cases, a mens rea must be established before or even during an actus reus to constitute that a crime has taken place. (One…

Sources Used in Documents:

Cite this Document:

"Crime Actus Reus May Be The Most" (2011, February 25) Retrieved April 23, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/crime-actus-reus-may-be-the-most-49852

"Crime Actus Reus May Be The Most" 25 February 2011. Web.23 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/crime-actus-reus-may-be-the-most-49852>

"Crime Actus Reus May Be The Most", 25 February 2011, Accessed.23 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/crime-actus-reus-may-be-the-most-49852

Related Documents

Actus Reus Does Tom meet the actus reus requirement to be prosecuted for the deaths? Yes, Tom meets the actus reus requirement, because he knows he is an epileptic and willingly operated a vehicle without medical authorization: thus, he willfully placed himself and others in a potentially dangerous situation. Though he did not will the seizure at that moment, he knew that there was always a possibility that he might have an

Criminal Law When can an actus reus be a failure? Actus reus generally involves three elements: (1) a voluntary act or failure to perform an act, (2) that causes, (3) a harm condemned under a criminal statute (Chapter 4: Actus Reus, p. 39).The general basis for imposing liability in criminal law is that the defendant must be proved to have committed a guilty act whilst having a guilty state of mind. As a

criminal case brief; the case under study is the Sullateskee vs. Oklahoma State case. An analysis will follow to ascertain if the key issue, in regard to the verdict, was Mens Rea or Actus Reus. Actus Reus and Mens Rea The Latin term Actus Reus means "the guilty act." In simple terms, it implies the physical deed of perpetrating a criminal offense. On the other hand, the Latin term Mens Rea

Crimes Against Property
PAGES 3 WORDS 880

Crimes Criminal Activities Crimes against public disorder In order to be convicted of disorderly conduct, according to the State of Massachusetts the defendant must have committed three specific things: 1) involved themselves in fighting, threatening, or violent behavior, or create a situation that is hazardous or physically offensive, 2) the defendants actions were most likely to affect the public, and 3) the defendant must have intended to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm,

A misdemeanor is punishable up to a year in a country jail (Cooley). In the case of Bill and Joe, Bill's action fulfills all the four elements required to prove a criminal threat. If Bill became successful with his threat, he could have killed or severely injured Joe with the bat. His words conveyed his intent to kill Joe. The intent was clear and complete from his utterance. The threat

But as the morality associated with a society changes as that society changes, it may be that someday people will no longer maintain a difference between attempted murder and actual murder, without it leading to some dystopian future where everyone is hounded by the legal system. Bibliography Boutellier, Hans, Crime and Morality: The Significance of Criminal Justice in Post-Modern Culture, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 2000, p. 4. Gardner, John, "Law and Morality," retrieved