CRIMINAL LAW - Professor Moskovitz
MIDTERM EXAM - Tuesday,
OUTLINE OF ISSUES
I. Murder
A. Intent to kill? One slug in belly not much evidence of this. No threats.
B. Intent to commit serious bodily injury? No evidence.
C. Depraved heart (extreme recklessness)?
How high was risk D was aware of? Compare Bolsinger.
1. Slug in belly near stairwell?
2. D knew V was drunk, likely to lose balance.
D. Felony murder?
1. Larceny? Doesn’t qualify. See Phillips.
2. Robbery?
a. Of torts book?
I. Did D take book? (Yes, as he took possession momentarily. Carrying away not required.)
II. Did D have intent to steal? Doesn’t seem so, as it was his book. But is “claim of right” a defense to
robbery? Seems so,
under
b. Of crim book?
I. Did D intend to permanently deprive V of this book?
II. Did D use force to take book?
c. Was killing committed in perpetration of robbery? Compare Salas. Seems so, as during escape, and D had not reached point of temporary safety.
3. Burglary?
a. Intent to steal at time of entry into building?
I. Intent to permanently deprive V of criminal law book?
II. When he entered building?
b. Is entry into locker an entry into part of the building? If so, did D have intent to permanently deprive at that point?
c. Was killing in perpetration of burglary?
II. First Degree Murder
A. No evidence of premeditation.
B. But first degree conviction might be based on robbery or buglary.
If risk insufficiently high for depraved heart, it might nevertheless be sufficient for involuntary manslaughter. Compare Bolsinger.
IV. Voluntary Manslaughter
A. Were V’s actions sufficient to provoke reasonable person to heat of passion?
B. Was D actually provoked to heat of passion?
C. Would reasonable person have cooled off?
D. Did D cool off?