Droit pénal et procédure

Criminal Law & Procedure

Crimes, défenses, infractions naissantes et règles de procédure pénale des quatrième, cinquième et sixième amendements.

Chapitre 11 heure de lecture32 questions pratiques

Lire le chapitre 1 gratuitement Pratiquez 10 questions

Chapitres

1General Principles of Criminal LiabilityThe building blocks of every crime and of every Criminal Law answer: how the subject is tested and which law applies; the sources of criminal law and the constitutional limits of legality, vagueness and ex post facto; the voluntary act, the qualifying omission and possession; the common-law mental states and the four Model Penal Code levels, with mistake of fact and mistake of law; concurrence, transferred intent, and actual and proximate cause; corporate and vicarious liability and merger; and the California framing in Penal Code sections 20, 25, 26, 28, 29 and 29.4, with a preview of imperfect self-defense.63 minGratuit

En quoi la Californie diffère

Du chapitre 1

CADistinction californienne

Unconsciousness

Règle générale (fédérale / majoritaire)

General law treats a movement made while unconscious as no voluntary act, so no crime is committed (MPC § 2.01(2)). The point is argued as a missing element of the actus reus, not as a separate defense.

Californie

Pen. Code § 26, class Four, makes unconsciousness a complete defense, and the jury is instructed on it as a defense (People v. Newton (1970) 8 Cal.App.3d 359). Exception: unconsciousness from voluntary intoxication is never a complete defense. Under § 29.4 it may negate only specific intent, premeditation, deliberation or express malice, so a killing can still be involuntary manslaughter.

If the call names California, write “unconsciousness under Penal Code section 26” as a defense heading. Under general law, discuss it under the voluntary-act element. Under both, unconsciousness from voluntary drinking or drug use is never a complete defense.

CADistinction californienne

Imperfect self-defense (preview of chapter 3)

Règle générale (fédérale / majoritaire)

States split on a killing in an honest but unreasonable belief in the need for deadly self-defense. Many reduce it to voluntary manslaughter; others call it murder. The MPC grades it by the defendant’s fault: a reckless belief means manslaughter, a negligent belief means negligent homicide (MPC § 3.09(2)).

Californie

An honest but unreasonable belief in the need to defend against imminent danger of death or great bodily injury negates malice. The killing is voluntary manslaughter, not murder (People v. Flannel (1979) 25 Cal.3d 668). In re Christian S. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 768 held that the rule survived the statutes that abolished diminished capacity.

On any homicide essay, raise imperfect self-defense under voluntary manslaughter: many states recognize it, and the MPC reaches a similar result by § 3.09(2). If the call names California, cite Flannel.

Leçons

Andre Booker

Conférencier Droit pénal et procédure

Former Los Angeles deputy public defender, now trial and appellate defense counsel.

Nos conférenciers sont des enseignants dotés d’une voix IA; les portraits sont des illustrations.

Les leçons vidéo pour Droit pénal et procédure sont en cours d'enregistrement.

Les 13 matières à partir de 249 $ par mois

Questions MBE et californiennes illimitées, séries et simulations chronométrées, commentaires de rédaction sur l'IA, chaque chapitre tel qu'il est publié et un plan d'étude construit autour de la date de votre examen.

Voir les forfaits