CRIMINAL LAW
SPRING, 2015
PROFESSOR BEDI
Office: 744
E-mail: mbedi@depaul.edu
Monday and Wednesday (Room 903)
1:00 – 2:15 p.m.
1. Introduction
This course introduces you to the substantive law underlying criminal liability. We will
explore, among other things, the principles of punishment, the basic elements of a crime,
and the defenses to crimes. The course should cover the following topics, though this
may change slightly as we proceed through the semester.
Burden of Proof
Jury Nullification
Theories of Punishment
Statutory Interpretation
Actus Reus and Mens Rea
Mistake of Law and Mistake of Fact
Causation
Homicide/Felony Murder
Rape
Inchoate Crimes: Attempt and Conspiracy
Accomplice Liability
Defenses
2. Required Text
There is one required text for the course:
JOSHUA DRESSLER: CASES AND MATERIALS ON CRIMINAL LAW(6th Ed).
I will also electronically distribute supplemental materials as necessary throughout the
course.
4. Office Hours
Monday: 5:15 p.m. – 6:15 p.m.
Wednesday: 2:15 -3:15
I am also available by appointment.
5. Attendance and Class Participation
Attendance is mandatory. You are expected to attend all classes regularly and
punctually. If you will be absent or late for a class, I expect that you will notify by
email. Excessive absences or tardiness may result in a lowering of your grade (see
Grading below), a grade of FX, or withdrawal from the class.
It is important that you read the assigned material and come to class prepared to discuss
it. Class sessions will take the form of group discussions. As moderator of those
discussions, I will usually call randomly on a few members of the class during each
session in addition to hearing from volunteers. In order for me to get to know each of
you by name, I will ask you each to pick a seat on the first day of class and record it on a
seating chart, at which time that will become your seat for the rest of the semester.
The ability to think on your feet is an important part of becoming a lawyer. That said,
the purpose of having a class discussion is not to measure the quality of one response
against another, or to create additional pressure on students. The purpose of having an
interactive class is to encourage you to think critically about the material and to enrich
the discussion by bringing a wider variety of perspectives to bear. You will find that
there are often many ways to approach a difficult legal question, and a broader
discussion is more likely to identify those different approaches. Put another way, I
encourage you to think of the opportunity to participate in class as one that will enhance
your ability to learn, not just enhance your chances of feeling uncomfortable in front of
your peers.
A student will be allowed to opt out of being called on during class. I will allow each
student to opt out three times during the semester. If I call on you during class and you
are not prepared, you can simply say “pass” and I will move on to another student. I
will not call on you again during that class period and this will constitute your pass for
the semester. The benefit of this method as opposed to you emailing me prior to class is
that you may not get called on during class even if you happen not to be prepared that
day. I hope this will allow greater ease in class discussion, while decreasing any related
anxiety. Participation my impact your grade (see Grading below).
6. Students with Disabilities
Students seeking disability-related accommodations are required to register with
DePaul’s Center for Students with Disabilities (CSD) enabling you to access
accommodations and support services to assist your success. There are two office
locations:
• Loop Campus – Lewis Center #1420 – (312) 362-8002
• Lincoln Park Campus – Student Center #370 – (773) 325-1677
•
Students are also invited to contact me privately to discuss your challenges and how I
may assist in facilitating the accommodations you will use in this course. This is best
done early in the term and our conversation will remain confidential.
7. Grading
Students’ grades shall be based on a final in class examination administrated at the end
of the semester. The exam will be closed book and closed notes. I will provide you
with more details as to the type of questions as the course progresses.
Significant contributions to class discussions may increase a student’s grade by a half
letter grade (e.g. B to B+, A- to A). Quality (as opposed to quantity) participation is the
determining factor for an increase in grade. Conversely, I reserve the right to lower a
final grade by a half letter grade (or more) for unpreparedness, tardiness, class disruption,
and/or excessive absences.
8. Class Assignments
I will be sending assignments in groups so that we can adjust the reading based on class
discussion. As you can see, the assignments are broken down by each week. We will
cover that material during the two class periods on Monday and Wednesday. The
bolded pages indicate the reading for Monday or the first half of that week. The nonbolded portion indicates the reading for Wednesday or the second half of that week. For
example, for the first day of class you should read casebook pages: 1-5 (background); 9;
11-12 (note 4); 13-16; 18-22; 30-31; 34-36; 39-40 (do not read Kant); 49-51, which will
cover the following cases: Owens v. State, State v. Ragland, Queen v. Dudley and
Stephens,
You will notice that the reading is not burdensome. I therefore will expect everyone to
have briefed the cases and thoroughly read the assigned notes. (see Cases and Case
Notes below).
9. Academic Integrity
DePaul University is a learning community that fosters the pursuit of knowledge and the
transmission of ideas within a context that emphasizes a sense of responsibility for
oneself, for others and for society at large. Violations of academic integrity, in any of
their forms, are, therefore, detrimental to the values of DePaul, to the students’ own
development as responsible members of society, and to the pursuit of knowledge and the
transmission of ideas. Violations include but are not limited to the following categories:
cheating; plagiarism; fabrication; falsification or sabotage of research data; destruction
or misuse of the university’s academic resources; alteration or falsification of academic
records; and academic misconduct. Conduct that is punishable under the Academic
Integrity Policy could result in additional disciplinary actions by other university
officials and possible civil or criminal prosecution. Please refer to your Student
Handbook or visit Academic Integrity at DePaul University
(http://academicintegrity.depaul.edu) for further details.
10. Cases and Case Notes
You’ll notice that we cover anywhere from 5-10 cases a week. Don’t be alarmed by the
long list of cases for certain weeks. Most (though not all) are very short and as you will
see, they are not overly complicated nor do they have lengthy factual details. The
general goal of these cases is to understand the doctrine that is being presented and its
underlying rationale and apply this rule in different circumstances. To this end, you will
notice I have assigned certain notes after the cases. You are expected to read the
assigned notes just as carefully as the cases and think about the answers. While you
don’t have to write your answers down, we will discuss the notes in class and so I will
assume that you are ready to talk about them.
11. First Set of Assignments
Week 1: 1-5 (background); 9; 11-12 (note 4); 13-16; 18-22; 30-31; 34-36; 39-40 (do
not read Kant); 49-50; 51-56; 72-77
Topics: Burden of Proof; Jury Nullification; Theories of Punishment;
Cases: Owens v. State
State v. Ragland
Queen v. Dudley and Stephens
People v. Du
Coker v. Georgia
Week 2: 95-103; 113-125; 125 (note 1); 127-128; 128-130 (notes 2, 4); 130-133; 134135 (notes 5, 6, 8); 136-138; 139-140 (note 2); 142-146; 146; Appendix 946-947
Topics: Statutory Interpretation; Actus Reus; Voluntary Act; Omissions;
Duty to Act
Cases: Keeler v. Superior Court
City of Chicago v. Morales
Muscarello v. United States
Martin v. State
State v. Utter
People v. Beardsley
Barber v. Superior Court
M.P.C. Provisions: Section 1.13(2)-(7) and Section 2.01(1)-(3)
Week 3: 149-151 (background); 151-152; 153-155; 156-159 (notes 3, 4, 6); 159-163;
163 (notes 1, 2); 164-166; 169-173; 174 (note 3); 176-182; Appendix 946-948
Topics: Mens Rea; Model Penal Code Approach; Interpreting
Culpability in Statutes; Strict Liability
Cases: Regina v. Cunningham
People v. Conley
State v. Nations
Flores-Figueroa v. United States
Staples v. United States
M.P.C. Provisions: Section 1.13(10) and Section 2.02(1)-(4), (7)