Law Commons^™

Sorting Guilty Minds, Owen D. Jones, Francis X. Shen, Morris B. Hoffman, Joshua D. Greene, Rene Marois

Owen Jones

Because punishable guilt requires that bad thoughts accompany bad acts, the Model Penal Code (MPC) typically requires that jurors infer the past mental state of a criminal defendant. More specifically, jurors must sort that mental state into one of four specific categories - purposeful, knowing, reckless, or negligent - which in turn defines the nature of the crime and the extent of the punishment. The MPC therefore assumes that ordinary people naturally sort mental states into these four categories with a high degree of accuracy, or at least can reliably do so when properly instructed. It also assumes that ordinary …

Prosecuting Conduit Campaign Contributions - Hard Time For Soft Money, Robert D. Probasco

Robert Probasco

In recent years, there have been several high-profile prosecutions for violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act, involving contributions nominally by one individual but funded or reimbursed by another individual deemed to be the true contributor. Prosecutions of these “conduit contribution” cases have been surprising in at least three significant respects. First, the prosecutions have been based on violations of FECA’s reporting requirements and may not have involved any violations of the substantive prohibitions or limitations of contributions. Second, the defendants were the donors rather than campaign officials who actually filed reports with FECA. Third, the cases were prosecuted as …

Rape And Force: The Forgotten Mens Rea, Kit Kinports

Kit Kinports

In rape cases involving physical violence or express threats of physical harm, proof of the actus reus obviously does establish mens rea with respect to force as well as nonconsent. A defendant who beat or threatened to kill his victim could hardly raise a plausible argument that he did not know he was using force. But, in other circumstances, the defendant's mens rea vis-a-vis force may be less clear, and it may therefore make a difference whether a rape conviction requires proof that the defendant purposely intended to use force, or whether it is enough that he knew he was …

Rosemond, Mens Rea, And The Elements Of Complicity, Kit Kinports

Kit Kinports

The confluence of two widely invoked federal statutes – one governing accomplice liability, the other imposing a sentencing enhancement when firearms are involved in a violent or drug-trafficking crime – reached the Supreme Court this past Term in Rosemond v. United States. The Court’s analysis of the mens rea issues raised in that case starkly illustrates the confusion characterizing this area of complicity law, which has attracted surprisingly little attention from courts, legislators, or scholars. The lack of clarity is particularly acute for crimes like the weapons offense in Rosemond that can plausibly be interpreted to include a circumstance element. …

Authority, Ignorance, And The Guilty Mind, Stephen P. Garvey

Stephen P. Garvey

No abstract provided.

Bringing Coherence To Mens Rea Analysis For Securities-Related Offenses, Michael L. Seigel

Michael L Seigel

This Article has demonstrated that the failure of commentators and the courts to tackle mens rea analysis head-on has resulted in lasting incoherence in the law. Unintelligible legal doctrine does not simply upset individuals who strive for elegant solutions to legal problems; it also exacts a huge, real-life toll. Juries faced with incoherent legal instructions are likely to become disillusioned about the justice system. Citizens receive inadequate guidance as to acceptable and unacceptable behavior, hampering deterrence -- particularly in the securities-law arena, where one presumably finds mostly rational actors who would be deterred by clear legal rules. Securities regulation is …

Blameworthiness, Intent And Cultural Dissonance, Nancy Kim

Nancy Kim

Criminal law assumes that the judge and jury share the same cultural and experiential framework as the defendant; accordingly, crimes are defined with this assumption as an underlying premise. In this article, I will explain how the determination of mens rea often fails to reflect culpability because the definition of crimes fail to account for the cultural dissonance that often exists between the judge/juror and the accused. In this Article, I propose an analysis and reconceptualization of intent that bridges gaps in perception and understanding attributable to cultural dissonance.

Proportional Mens Rea, Stephen F. Smith

Stephen F. Smith

No abstract provided.

Regulatory Crime: Solutions, Lucian Dervan

Lucian E Dervan

On November 14, 2013, Professor Dervan was called to testify before the United States House of Representatives' Committee on the Judiciary Over-Criminalization Task Force. Available here is his written testimony. In his written testimony, Professor Dervan examines the phenomenon of over-criminalization, particularly in the regulatory area, and offers several recommended solutions for Congressional adoption. First, he recommends the adoption of a default rule for mens rea. Second, he recommends the adoption of a default rule applying mens rea to all material elements of an offense. Third, he recommends the codification of the Rule of Lenity. Finally, along with some additional …

The Story Of Clark: The Incredible Shrinking Insanity Defense, Janine Young Kim

Janine Kim

Paved With Good Intentions: The Fate Of Strict Liability Under The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Kalyani Robbins

Kalyani Robbins

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) contains a very broad ban on harming migratory birds, as well as a strict liability standard for misdemeanor violations. Without further limitation, the MBTA would theoretically apply to countless ordinary life activities, such as driving a car or having windows on one’s home. Naturally, there are due process concerns with such a scenario, so Congress expressly left it to the Department of the Interior to draft more detailed implementing regulations. Unfortunately, the existing regulations fail to adequately address the potential overbreadth of the MBTA’s misdemeanor application, forcing the courts to do so on an …

Defining Criminal Liability For Primary Acts Of Copyright Infringement: The Singapore Experience, Cheng Lim Saw, Susanna Leong

Cheng L Saw

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of Thirty-Five Years Of Rape Reform: A Frustrating Search For Fundamental Fairness, Richard Klein

Richard Daniel Klein

This article will analyze the most significant changes in the manner in which individuals who are charged with the crime of rape are prosecuted for that offense. In the last thirty-five years, there has been a steady erosion of the due process rights of those accused of rape.

The Ethics Of Willful Ignorance, Rebecca Roiphe

Rebecca Roiphe

In general, courts, legislatures, and regulators do not excuse individuals, including lawyers, from legal obligations because they turned a blind eye to the underlying facts. By defining knowledge as “actual knowledge,” the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct, however, allow lawyers to avoid responsibilities to the community and the public by remaining ignorant of the relevant facts. For example, lawyers do not face disciplinary charges for assisting in client fraud as long as they avoid information that might lead them to know about the criminal conduct. David Luban, one of the leading scholars in the field, has defended the ABA’s …

Conceptualizing Complicity In Alien Tort Cases, Chimene I. Keitner

Chimene I Keitner

No abstract provided.

Fear And Loathing In Insanity Law: Explaining The Otherwise Inexplicable Clark V. Arizona, Susan Rozelle

Seattle University

Eric Clark believed he was battling space aliens when he shot and killed Officer Jeffrey Moritz. Charged under a first-degree murder statute that requires knowledge the victim is a police officer, Clark should have been “not guilty” two ways: first, by reason of insanity, and second, because he did not satisfy the mens rea requirement. Instead, he was found guilty, and the United States Supreme Court’s decision upholding this result tortured insanity law jurisprudence. The only plausible explanation for the Court’s decision lies in society’s emotional reaction to mental illness. Fear and loathing have displaced not only care and compassion, …