Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … traditional sense. So how can possession crimes satisfy the actus reus requirement?
Actus reus is defined as any criminal action that came about as the result of a voluntary/willful action by the body in question. For example, someone who is sleepwalking cannot commit an actus reus because he is not voluntarily moving. However, a person who voluntarily robs a bank is committing an actus reus.
This is an important concept in criminal law because it identifies the need for there to be voluntary action on the part of the actor. For example, if one were forced to rob a bank against his will, such an individual could not in justice be charged with a crime since he did not voluntarily commit the action. Essentially, actus reus is about establishing justice with regards to the will and mind of the individual. The concept can be distorted if one gets into the argument about subjective and objective intent; however, by keeping the argument on a simple cause and effect level of understanding it can be simple to see whether the actor meets the requirements for actus reus. If the mind or will is voluntarily intending to commit a crime then the mens rea supports the actus...
Thus, if one is possessing there is obviously and intent to use, otherwise why would someone posses? That is how possession crimes satisfy the actus resu requirement: the act of possessing indicates that there is a reason for possessing and thus an intent or a consent of the mind and will (Lehman, Phelps, 2008).
2. What are some of the Model Penal Code's examples of non-voluntary acts? Do you think it would be difficult in most cases to prove whether a defendant acted voluntarily? Why or why not?
Some model penal code examples of non-voluntary acts are having a seizure in a car and killing someone; or sleepwalking and hurting someone. These are nonvoluntary acts. It would not be difficult to prove a person acted voluntarily if they knew in advance that they were liable to have seizures and drove anyway. This is negligence.
3. What are some examples of when the failure to act could impose criminal responsibility on a person? Do you feel as if the Government is justified in imposing affirmative obligations on its citizens and them putting them in prison for not following them?
Failure to act as in when someone is robbing someone else…
References
Leppik, I. (2006). Epilepsy: A Guide to Balancing Your Life. NY: Demos Medical
Publishing.
Lehman, J., Phelps, S. (2008). West's Encyclopedia of American Law. MI: Gale.
People v. Decina. (1956). Appeals Court. Retrieved from http://www2.onu.edu/~s-veltri/documents/Decina.pdf
This was due to the fact that defense attorneys often attempted to prove consent by showing that a victim did not resist the assault or had a sexual history suggesting that she would have consented to the sexual contact. Now, N.J.S.2C:14-2 no longer contains a requirement that the perpetrator overcame a resisting victim. Instead, in cases of forcible rape, the Code simply requires that the defendant: committed the assault
Criminal Law Every country regardless of its size and location has some form of criminal law existing. This law helps the country define punishable offenses and includes country's stand of such concepts as self-defense, necessity, insanity, negligence, and complicity. Criminal law is clearly written law in other words, it is a codified law. In the United States this codified law is known as the Model Penal Code which has helped in
The subchapters tend to follow similar structures, with the punishment in each case being discussed at the very end. Chapter 10 refers to crimes against habitation, notably criminal acts such as burglary or arson. The conditions for a criminal act of this nature to occur are discussed, as well as the different statutes that regulate the legal framework for each of these situations and the punishments applicable. Important restrictions apply
On the other hand, his wife said that they dated for about nine months and then were engaged for about a year before they got married. There was some discrepancy in the Personal and Progress notes of Mr. W pertaining to the involvement of Mr. W in women during his time in high school, however, which does not have much role to play in this case. Mr. W claimed
While Louie, Billy, and Smokey can all be charged with federal crimes in relation to the bank robbery, Billy can also be charged with the murdered of his estranged wife. In the case of his murdered wife, the state would be responsible for pressing charges for that crime because the murder was completely separate from the bank robbery. Just because it happened on the same day as the robbery,
However, as criminals become more aware of undercover tactics, the covert officer is required to provide more and more proof that he is indeed a criminal- which leads to the officer committing acts that compromise his or her integrity for the sake of maintaining cover. By understanding the often conflicting nature of these goals, deception and integrity, we can see how an undercover officer can become confused, lost, and