MR: intent to commit the crime, but you can't have attempts for reckless or negligent crimes. no attempt for felony murder except in FL
AR: common law rule from new york (dangerous proximity)
MPC is substantial step
rizzo. when the defendant couldn't find the victim,
1. 2:55pm - anne decideds to kill bob, who lives 20 miles away
2. 3:00 pm - anne loads her gun
3. 3:30 pm - anne sets off for bob's house with the gun
4. 3:55 pm - anne arrives at bob's house
at this point, anne's actions fit an attempt via the MPC
at this point, anne's actions fit an attempt via the MPC
5. 3:56 pm - anne aurveys the area
6. 4:00 pm - anne returns to her car
7. 5:15 pm - anne lies in wait with the gun
at this point it's questionable if she fits an attempt at the NYPL
at this point it's questionable if she fits an attempt at the NYPL
8. 5:20 pm - bob does not arrive home at the expected time
9. 5:35 pm - anne leaves, bob arrives home five min later
if anne leaves, is she attempting still?
abandonment.
there's no harm.
therefore there's no culpability.
anne has renounced her decision to kill bob.
she's no longer dangerous at step 13.
we want to encourage abandonment, because otherwise there's not encouragement to not go forward with the prohibited act.
renunciation NYPL 40.10
(1) abandoned/prevented
(2) voluntary and complete
not increased fear
** not postponement
there's a difference between thinking about sleeping with a 15 year old and doing it. proof problems are an issue, in addition to
when we get to step 13: anne is guilty of attempted murder, BUT if she can prove that she abandoned, she gets off with that defense.
if someone sticks their hand in dean simon's pocket to rob him, but there's nothing there are they guilty of larceny? NO; no harm not culpable
of attempted larcency? YES; they demonstrated their danger (U) and they have a culpable intent (R)
dean simons is gonna kill albina and says "die sucker" but there's no bullets in the gun.
attempted murder? YES; demonstrated danger and culpable intent
hypo.
you think it's a crime to skip crim law. you say to the cops "arrest me! i skipped" and then you say "arrest me because i attempted to skip!"
hypo.
walking through times sq and pass a shifty guy with a brief case filled with watches. you need a watch. he has a rolex for $10. you think that they're stolen, potentially but you buy one anyway.
are you guilty of receipt of stolen property?
are you guilty of attempt?
under the MPC/NYPL: d is guilty of an attempt if he would have been guilty of a crime had the circumstances revealed themselves to be as he believed them to be.
under NYPL, we take the opposite approach, and attempts are usually 1 grade less serious. exceptions are murder 1 and serious drug felonies. but murder 1 and 2 are both A1 penalties, but you're still under an A grade as an attempted murder.
the distinctions between harm and culpability
the distincctions between retribution and utilitarianism
the distinctions between subjective and objective
the distinctions between politics and morals
the distinctions between vengenance and punishment
EMPATHY!!!
if anne leaves, is she attempting still?
new hypo.
11. 5:15pm anne lies in wait with the gun
12. 5:20 pm bob arrives home; anne aims
bob exits the car
anne puts her figner on the trigger, bob's daughter appears
(if change of heart happened, abandonment)
anne decides to wait until the next day
13. later anne decides not to kill bob abandonment.
there's no harm.
therefore there's no culpability.
anne has renounced her decision to kill bob.
she's no longer dangerous at step 13.
we want to encourage abandonment, because otherwise there's not encouragement to not go forward with the prohibited act.
renunciation NYPL 40.10
(1) abandoned/prevented
(2) voluntary and complete
not increased fear
** not postponement
arguments under abandonment.
BUT -- if she abandons because she's worried of getting caught, she's still demonstrated her immorality. OR -- she's not culpable, because she got rid of the intent and acted in the manner that we want for people to do: it's a conundrum of punishing successful deterrence
BUT -- if she's only afraid because she doesn't want to get caught, she is even more dangerous in a sense because she will just think of a way to commit the crime with less chance of being caught
is our approach to law subjective or objective:
SUB: we have to figure out what people are thinking... in the real world, how do we know?
OBJ: the objective elements can be there's a difference between thinking about sleeping with a 15 year old and doing it. proof problems are an issue, in addition to
when we get to step 13: anne is guilty of attempted murder, BUT if she can prove that she abandoned, she gets off with that defense.
if someone sticks their hand in dean simon's pocket to rob him, but there's nothing there are they guilty of larceny? NO; no harm not culpable
of attempted larcency? YES; they demonstrated their danger (U) and they have a culpable intent (R)
dean simons is gonna kill albina and says "die sucker" but there's no bullets in the gun.
attempted murder? YES; demonstrated danger and culpable intent
factual possibility is NOT a defense!
hypo.
you think it's a crime to skip crim law. you say to the cops "arrest me! i skipped" and then you say "arrest me because i attempted to skip!"
factual impossibility because there's no prohibited behavior!
the problems are the inbetween...
hypo.
walking through times sq and pass a shifty guy with a brief case filled with watches. you need a watch. he has a rolex for $10. you think that they're stolen, potentially but you buy one anyway.
are you guilty of receipt of stolen property?
are you guilty of attempt?
lady elton's lace.
impossibility at common law:
* factual impossibility (not a defense)
* legal impoosibility (defense)
* hybrid impossibility (who knows? shooting a corpse, like the dekki problem)
under the MPC/NYPL: d is guilty of an attempt if he would have been guilty of a crime had the circumstances revealed themselves to be as he believed them to be.
grading attempts.
under MPC, they are the same as the BARREK but the exception is culpability. under NYPL, we take the opposite approach, and attempts are usually 1 grade less serious. exceptions are murder 1 and serious drug felonies. but murder 1 and 2 are both A1 penalties, but you're still under an A grade as an attempted murder.
the distinctions between harm and culpability
the distincctions between retribution and utilitarianism
the distinctions between subjective and objective
the distinctions between politics and morals
the distinctions between vengenance and punishment
EMPATHY!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment