Criminal Law: Murder β SIMPLIFIED
TLDRIn this video from Personal Bar Prep, Jay simplifies the complex subject of murder for the California bar exam. He explains the need to understand three jurisdictional perspectives: common law, the Model Penal Code, and a generalized approach to degrees of murder. Jay clarifies the elements of actus reus and mens rea, and how they apply to different types of murder, including felony murder. He also discusses how to determine the degree of murder and uses a hypothetical case to illustrate the analysis process, concluding with the likely charge of second-degree murder.
Takeaways
- π The video aims to simplify the concept of murder under the California bar exam, emphasizing the need to understand three jurisdictional perspectives: common law, the Model Penal Code (MPC), and statutory construction of degrees of murder.
- π All three perspectives require the same elements of actus reus (the act) and mens rea (the mental state), which must occur simultaneously for a crime to be committed.
- π Common law defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human with malice aforethought, which can be shown through intent to kill, intent to cause great bodily harm, reckless disregard for human life, or felony murder.
- π The Deadly Weapon Doctrine infers an intent to kill when a deadly weapon is used in a manner that is inherently deadly, such as shooting a loaded gun at someone.
- π« The Model Penal Code (MPC) differs from common law by not including felony murder and requiring either purposeful or knowing actions or extreme recklessness for the mens rea of murder.
- π The MPC presumes extreme recklessness when one of the enumerated felonies (burglary, arson, rape, robbery, or kidnapping) is committed alongside a death, leading to a murder charge.
- βοΈ Degrees of murder are not covered by common law or the MPC but are a statutory construction. Common law murder equates to second-degree murder, which can be aggravated to first-degree based on factors like premeditation, deliberation, or specific methods of killing.
- π€ The script provides an example of a case involving a defendant with a history of mental illness who kills a customer in an altercation, discussing whether this constitutes first-degree or second-degree murder.
- π The analysis of the case involves determining if the killing was unlawful, if there was intent to kill or cause harm, and if there was premeditation or adequate provocation to consider voluntary manslaughter.
- π The video concludes that the defendant is likely guilty of second-degree murder based on the provided facts, as there was no premeditation or adequate provocation to reduce the charge to voluntary manslaughter.
- π The importance of understanding and integrating the three jurisdictional perspectives to analyze a murder case is highlighted, as it is crucial for success on the California bar exam.
Q & A
What is the main topic of the video?
-The main topic of the video is the simplification of the concept of murder in the context of the California bar exam.
Why is murder a complicated subject on the California bar exam?
-Murder is a complicated subject on the California bar exam because it requires understanding three distinct jurisdictional perspectives and seamlessly tying them together in a coherent essay.
What are the two essential elements required for all crimes according to the video?
-The two essential elements required for all crimes are actus reus, which is the act that the defendant must commit, and mens rea, which is the mental state of the defendant.
What is the actus reus in the context of common law murder?
-In the context of common law murder, the actus reus is the unlawful killing of a human being by another.
What is the mens rea requirement for common law murder?
-The mens rea requirement for common law murder is malice aforethought, which can be demonstrated through intent to kill, intent to cause great bodily harm, reckless disregard for human life, or felony murder.
What are the four ways to show malice aforethought in common law murder?
-The four ways to show malice aforethought in common law murder are: 1) Intent to kill, 2) Intent to cause great bodily harm, 3) Reckless disregard for human life, and 4) Felony murder.
What is the difference between the common law and the Model Penal Code (MPC) in terms of murder?
-The Model Penal Code (MPC) differs from common law in that it has only three ways to find the mens rea requirement for murder, and it does not include felony murder as a separate category. Instead, it presumes extreme recklessness in cases where an enumerated felony is committed and someone dies.
What are the three mens rea requirements for murder under the Model Penal Code (MPC)?
-The three mens rea requirements for murder under the Model Penal Code are: 1) Purposefully or knowingly killing another, 2) Acting with extreme recklessness that causes someone to die.
How does the Model Penal Code handle the concept of felony murder?
-The Model Penal Code does not have a separate category for felony murder. Instead, it creates a rebuttable presumption of extreme recklessness when one of the enumerated felonies is committed and someone dies, which can lead to a conviction for murder.
What are the factors that can aggravate a murder from second degree to first degree?
-Factors that can aggravate a murder from second degree to first degree include premeditation and deliberation, the method of killing (such as ambushing, torturing, using a bomb, or poisoning), and felony murder.
What is the role of provocation in determining whether a murder can be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter?
-Provocation plays a role in determining whether a murder can be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter if it can be shown that there was adequate provocation and an inadequate cooling-off period. However, the provocation must be of a nature that a reasonable person would be provoked to kill.
Outlines
π Introduction to California Bar's Murder Perspective
Jay from Personal Bar Prep introduces the video series 'Simplified' aimed at making complex subjects like murder on the California bar exam more understandable. He emphasizes the need to understand three distinct jurisdictional perspectives on murder and integrate them into a coherent essay. The video will cover the common law, the Model Penal Code (MPC), and the concept of degrees of murder. Jay explains the fundamental legal concepts of actus reus (the act that must be committed for a crime to occur) and mens rea (the mental state required for a crime), both of which must occur simultaneously. The common law perspective defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought, which can be demonstrated through intent to kill, intent to cause great bodily harm, reckless disregard for human life, or felony murder.
π Common Law and Model Penal Code Murder Perspectives
Jay continues by explaining the common law murder perspective, which does not differentiate between degrees of murder. He then contrasts this with the Model Penal Code (MPC), which eliminates felony murder and defines murder based on three mens rea requirements: purposefully or knowingly killing another, or causing death through extreme recklessness. The MPC also introduces a rebuttable presumption of extreme recklessness when one of the enumerated felonies (burglary, arson, rape, robbery, kidnapping) is committed and results in a death. Jay also discusses the concept of degrees of murder, explaining that common law murder equates to second degree murder, and factors like premeditation, deliberation, and certain methods of killing can elevate a murder charge to first degree.
π Analyzing a Hypothetical Murder Case
In the final paragraph, Jay presents a hypothetical case involving a defendant with a history of mental illness who kills a customer in a grocery store after an argument. The discussion focuses on whether the defendant is guilty of first or second degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, or if any insanity defenses apply. Jay analyzes the actus reus (unlawful killing) and mens rea (intent to kill or cause great bodily harm) requirements, concluding that the defendant likely committed second degree murder due to the lack of premeditation and deliberation. He also considers whether the killing could be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter based on adequate provocation and a cooling-off period, ultimately determining that the immediate nature of the act and the lack of a reasonable provocation make this unlikely.
Mindmap
Keywords
π‘Murder
π‘Jurisdictional Perspectives
π‘Actus Reus
π‘Mens Rea
π‘Malice Aforethought
π‘Deadly Weapon Doctrine
π‘Reckless Disregard
π‘Felony Murder
π‘Model Penal Code (MPC)
π‘Degrees of Murder
π‘Adequate Provocation
Highlights
Murder on the California bar exam requires understanding of three distinct jurisdictional perspectives and integrating them into a coherent essay.
All crimes require an actus reus (criminal act) and mens rea (criminal intent) occurring simultaneously.
Common law defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human with malice aforethought.
Malice aforethought can be demonstrated through intent to kill, intent to cause great bodily harm, reckless disregard for human life, or felony murder.
Deadly Weapon Doctrine infers intent to kill when a deadly weapon is used in a manner that makes it deadly.
Model Penal Code (MPC) differs from common law by not having felony murder and focusing on purposeful or knowing actions or extreme recklessness.
MPC presumes extreme recklessness in murder cases involving enumerated felonies, which can lead to a murder conviction.
Degrees of murder are determined by factors such as premeditation, deliberation, method of killing, and felony murder.
Common law murder automatically establishes second-degree murder, which can be aggravated to first-degree based on certain factors.
Premeditation and deliberation involve sufficient time to consider and decide to commit murder.
Certain methods of killing, such as ambushing or poisoning, are considered first-degree murder due to their premeditated nature.
Felony murder is generally classified as first-degree murder, transferring the intent to commit the felony to the intent to kill.
Voluntary manslaughter can be considered if there is adequate provocation and no cooling-off period, reducing the charge from murder.
The case study of a grocery store worker with mental illness involves analyzing the presence of unlawful killing and the appropriate mens rea.
The defendant's statement 'I'm going to kill you' and the act of punching can be evidence of intent to cause great bodily harm or reckless disregard.
The lack of premeditation and deliberation in the heat of an argument suggests a charge of second-degree murder, not first-degree.
Adequate provocation is assessed based on whether a reasonable person would be provoked to kill under similar circumstances.
The immediacy of the defendant's reaction and lack of a cooling-off period make voluntary manslaughter unlikely in this case.
The analysis concludes that the defendant is most likely guilty of second-degree murder based on the given facts and legal principles.
Transcripts
Browse More Related Video
UCC 2-207 β SIMPLIFIED
Inside the trial of Louise Woodward: Baby killer or victim of flawed justice? | 60 Minutes Australia
Jury finds Jesse Alvarez guilty of murder in the first degree in death of Cathedral Catholic teacher
Forensic Files - Season 7, Episode 14 - A Leg to Stand On - Full Episode
Investigator Answers True Crime Questions From Twitter | Tech Support | WIRED
SIMPLIFIED β Character Evidence
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)
Thanks for rating: