A Synthesization of Criminal Law
Criminal Law, Winter 2012, BYU Law, Prof. S. Baradaran
Contents
I.
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 4
A.
Differences between Civil and Criminal Law ............................................................................... 4
B.
Sources of Criminal Law .................................................................................................................. 4
C.
Presumption of Innocence .............................................................................................................. 4
D.
Punishment Theories ........................................................................................................................ 4
E.
Legality ................................................................................................................................................ 4
II.
Elements of a Crime................................................................................................................................. 4
A.
Actus Reus.......................................................................................................................................... 4
B.
Mens Rea ............................................................................................................................................ 5
1. Common Law .................................................................................................................................... 5
2. Modern ............................................................................................................................................... 5
3. Specific Intent and General Intent ................................................................................................. 5
4. Transfer............................................................................................................................................... 5
5. Knowingly .......................................................................................................................................... 5
6. Strict Liability ..................................................................................................................................... 5
III.
A.
Mistake .................................................................................................................................................... 5
Mistake of Fact .................................................................................................................................. 5
1. Common Law .................................................................................................................................... 5
2. MPC .................................................................................................................................................... 6
B.
IV.
Mistake of Law .................................................................................................................................. 6
Causation ................................................................................................................................................ 6
A.
Actual Cause....................................................................................................................................... 6
B.
Proximate Cause ................................................................................................................................ 6
V.
Homicide .................................................................................................................................................... 7
A.
Murder ................................................................................................................................................ 7
1. MPC 210 ............................................................................................................................................. 7
2. Common Law .................................................................................................................................... 7
Page 1 of 18
3. Penn .................................................................................................................................................... 7
B.
Manslaughter ...................................................................................................................................... 7
1. MPC 210.3 .......................................................................................................................................... 7
2. Common Law .................................................................................................................................... 7
3. Penn .................................................................................................................................................... 8
C.
Provocation/Intentional Manslaughter ......................................................................................... 8
D.
Unintentional Homicide/Manslaughter......................................................................................... 8
E.
Felony Murder Rule .......................................................................................................................... 8
F. Misdemeanor Manslaughter ................................................................................................................. 9
VI.
Rape ......................................................................................................................................................... 9
A.
Common Law .................................................................................................................................... 9
B.
Reformed Statute............................................................................................................................... 9
C.
Rape by Fraud .................................................................................................................................... 9
1. Fraud in Factum ................................................................................................................................ 9
2. Fraud in Inducement ........................................................................................................................ 9
VII.
Accomplice Liability.............................................................................................................................. 9
A.
Common Law .................................................................................................................................... 9
B.
Modern Common Law ...................................................................................................................10
1. Natural and Probable Consequences Doctrine ..........................................................................10
2. Principal is Acquitted ......................................................................................................................10
3. Principal Convicted .........................................................................................................................10
4. Limits to Accomplice Liability ......................................................................................................10
VIII.
Inchoate Crimes ..............................................................................................................................11
A.
Solicitation ........................................................................................................................................11
B.
Conspiracy ........................................................................................................................................11
1. Mens Rea ..........................................................................................................................................11
2. Actus Reus........................................................................................................................................11
3. Common Law ..................................................................................................................................12
4. MPC ..................................................................................................................................................12
5. Pinkerton Doctrine .........................................................................................................................12
6. Bilateral v. Unilateral .......................................................................................................................12
Page 2 of 18
7. Scope of Agreement .......................................................................................................................12
8. Defenses ...........................................................................................................................................12
C.
Attempt .............................................................................................................................................13
1. Mens Rea ..........................................................................................................................................13
2. Actus Reus........................................................................................................................................13
3. MPC 5.01 ..........................................................................................................................................14
4. Defenses ...........................................................................................................................................14
5. Assault ...............................................................................................................................................14
IX.
X.
Larceny ..................................................................................................................................................15
Embezzlement.........................................................................................................................................15
XI.
False Pretenses .....................................................................................................................................15
XII.
Defense Categories..............................................................................................................................15
A.
Self Defense—A Justification .......................................................................................................15
1. MPC 3.04 ..........................................................................................................................................16
2. Rule of Aggressor ............................................................................................................................16
3. Duty to Retreat (Common Law) ...................................................................................................16
B.
Defense of Others, Property .........................................................................................................16
1. Defense of Property........................................................................................................................16
C.
Necessity ...........................................................................................................................................16
D.
Duress ...............................................................................................................................................16
1. Prison Escape ..................................................................................................................................16
E.
Intoxication ......................................................................................................................................17
1. Voluntary (Not Necessarily Widely Adopted) ............................................................................17
2. Involuntary (Broadly allowed, rarely invoked) ............................................................................17
XIII.
Insanity..............................................................................................................................................17
A.
The M'Naghten Rule: .....................................................................................................................17
B.
Irresistible Impulse or Control Test .............................................................................................17
C.
Durham Product Test.....................................................................................................................18
D.
MPC Test:.........................................................................................................................................18
E.
Diminished Capacity .......................................................................................................................18
Page 3 of 18
I.
II.
Introduction
A.
Differences between Civil and Criminal Law
 There are laws that prohibit or require certain actions.
 Commands are valid and binding on everyone who falls in jurisdiction.
 The community enforces sanctions for violation of these commands.
 Conviction is a moral condemnation from the community.
 Unpleasant physical consequences follow for conviction.
 Government is always involved with crime.
B.
Sources of Criminal Law
 Statutes (Primary source of criminal law)
 Cases (Common law is not very fair to potential criminals.)
 Constitutions (are not that detailed)
C.
Presumption of Innocence
Each element of a crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
D.
Punishment Theories
 Utilitarian
 Retributive
 Incapacitation
 Rehabilitation
E.
Legality
 Legislatures Make Law
 Laws Cannot be Vague
 Rule of Lenity
Elements of a Crime
A.
Actus Reus
Conduct + Result, voluntary
Exceptions:
 Reflex/Convulsion
 Sleep/unconscious
 Learned reaction
 Hypnosis
 Otherwise not a produce of the conscious or unconscious effort of person
Page 4 of 18
Omissions are all right, except:
 Statute imposes a duty
 Status of relationship
 Contract
 Assumes voluntary care/exclude other from aiding
 Harm
B.
III.
Mens Rea
1.
Common Law
Mens rea is measured by malice and intent.
2.
Modern
Purposefully, knowingly, recklessly, negligently. In the absence of statute
specifying mens rea, PKR apply, but not N. Proof of greater mens rea proves
lesser mens rea.
3.
Specific Intent and General Intent
Specific intent is when the statue says you steal for purpose of whatever.
General intent is the general intent to commit act, the reason being
irrelevant.
4.
Transfer
Intent transfers from person to person, but not necessarily from property to
person.
5.
Knowingly
Knowingly is usually satisfied by willful blindness—high probability that a
situation is what it is. However, actual belief that it isn’t the case is sufficient.
6.
Strict Liability
 Legislative intent (absolutely clear)
 Common Law
 Nature of conduct (highly dangerous)
 Severity of punishment (very light—strict fine)
Mistake
A.
Mistake of Fact
1.
Common Law
Depending on type of crime:

Strict liability: mistake irrelevant
Page 5 of 18


2.
Specific intent crime: mistake as to element = acquittal
General intent crime
o Not reasonable mistake: mistake irrelevant
o Reasonable mistake:
 If defendant didn’t think there was crime, acquittal
 If defendant thought it was lesser crime, mistake
irrelevant
MPC
2.04(1): Ignorance or mistake as to matter of fact is a defense if mistake
negatives the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness, or negligence required
to establish an element, OR the law provides that the state of mind
established by such a mistake constitutes a defense.
2.04(2): Belief that person was committing some crime invalidates mistake of
fact defense. However, can be punished only at degree of crime he believed.
B.
Mistake of Law
Ignorance of law generally not an excuse.
Exceptions:
 Awareness of law is a mens rea requirement
 Defendant had relied on an official statement (authorized reliance doctrine)
IV.
Causation
A.
Actual Cause
 But For Causation
 Acceleration
 Substantial Factor
 Concurrent Causes
B.
Proximate Cause
Doctrines
 De minimis harms
 Intended consequences
 Omissions
 Foreseeability of intervening causes—independent (not foreseeable, thus not
responsibility) and dependent (fire kills homeless person I building, guy
rushes in and dies, fireman dies, etc.).
 Apparent Safety
 Intervention by a free, deliberate, and informed agent
 Act of God
Page 6 of 18
MPC 2.03 (2) and (3)
V.
Homicide
A.
Murder
1.
MPC 210
a. Purposefully or knowingly
b. Recklessly with extreme indifference for human life
c. Felony murder
2.
Common Law
a. Killing with malice aforethought
i.
Intent to kill/inflict grievous bodily injury
ii.
Depraved heart
iii.
Felony Murder Rule
3.
Penn
a. Malice aforethought
b. First Degree
i.
Specified manner (poison, lying in wait)
ii.
Willful (intentional), deliberate (quality of your thinking),
premeditated (quantity of your thinking)
1. Hot/cold blood: Guthrie: Time period sufficient to make actor
conscious of what they were doing? The time period will vary
according to jurisdiction.
i.
Considerations
ii.
Provocations by the deceased
iii.
Ill will or previous difficulties
iv.
Statements made by victim, killer, bystanders
v.
Lethal Blows afterward (which can mean
whatever)
vi.
Brutal manner?
vii.
Nature and number of wounds
iii.
Felony Murder
c. 2nd Degree Murder
i.
Unspecified felony
ii.
Intent to inflict grievous bodily injury
iii.
Intent not premeditated
iv.
Reckless, depraved heart
B.
Manslaughter
1.
MPC 210.3
a. Recklessly, consciously taking a substantial risk (210.4)
b. EED/RED: extreme emotional disturbance that is a reasonable emotional
disturbance for that situation
i.
Reasonableness from victim's viewpoint
ii.
Words can be enough under MPC only
2.
Common Law
a. Voluntary--heat of passion
Page 7 of 18
b. Involuntary
c. Misdemeanor (basically similar to felony)
3.
C.
Penn
a. Voluntary: heat of passion
b. Involuntary: criminal negligence
Provocation/Intentional Manslaughter
Calculated to inflame passion of reasonable man.
Subjective: Nature of provocation itself
Objective: How reasonable person should have reacted to the provocation
Requirements:
Adequate provocation calculated to inflame, act not out of reason
Heat of passion
Sudden (no reasonable time to cool off)
Causal link between provocation, passion, and homicide
Adequate Provocations under Common Law
Extreme assault or battery
Mutual combat
Illegal arrest
Injury of a close relative
Spouse's adultery
D.
Unintentional Homicide/Manslaughter
1. Reckless
a. Consciously taking substantial and unjustifiable risk with no regard. Dog that
ate doghouse.
b. Thomas (high probability of death, wanton disregard, anti-social motive) and
c. Phillips (endangers a life, conscious disregard for endangerment)
2. Criminal Negligence
a. MPC 210.4
b. Accidentally taking a substantial & unjustifiable risk.
c. Gross negligence
3. Civil Negligence
a. Accidentally taking unjustifiable risk (not necessarily substantial--uneducated
people with gangrene baby)
E.
Felony Murder Rule
MPC 210.2: killing during a specified gives rise to rebuttable presumption of
recklessness.
To analyze:
Did killing happen during felony?
What limitations?
 Specified v. unspecified felonies (specified allows you to
assume that it was reckless or inherently dangerous)
 Independent felonious purpose (Merger Doctrine): Assault
based crimes are going to merger because of merger doctrine.
Page 8 of 18


The felony in question must be Inherently dangerous
Proximate cause (required)
o Agency approach, majority (person has to have done
the killing)
o Proximate cause, minority (person dies because of
causal chain)
This rule designed to encourage felons to be careful.
F.
VI.
VII.
Misdemeanor Manslaughter
Few states have it, and it is not in the MPC. The misdemeanor would be speeding or
selling liquor to a minor. The misdemeanor should be inherently dangerous.
Rape
A.
Common Law
Sexual intercourse with woman by force or threat of force against her will and
without consent. The common law requires utmost resistance.
B.
Reformed Statute
Sexual stuff with another person without person’s consent. Can be with spouse.
Also, if person unconscious, not good. Verbal resistance is all that is required.
C.
Rape by Fraud
State may or may not accept both as rape.
1.
Fraud in Factum
Person does not realize they are having sex.
2.
Fraud in Inducement
They know they are having sex, but have been gyped.
Accomplice Liability
Someone can be held liable for assisting or helping others commit crimes.
A.
Common Law
Accessories are not at the scene.
 1st degree principal: perpetrator
 2nd degree principal: abettors, aided, counseled, commanded, encouraged
 Accessory before fact: inciter, abettor (not in presence at time)
 Accessory after fact (obstruction of justice, harboring a criminal) (protects,
assists, helps hinder justice)
 There are strict logical rules about when the accessory can be tried.
Page 9 of 18
B.
Modern Common Law
Accomplice liability is the theory that allows the state to charge the person for the
same crime as everyone else
Principal
Accomplice
Less Serious Crime
Principal 1st
Accessory Before
Accessory After
Principal 2nd
Accomplice: intentionally assists principal in committing crime:


Actus Reus: (mere presence does not suffice)
o Physical conduct
o Psychological influence
o Omission (failure to prevent where there is legal duty in the case of
parents, cops, etc.)
Mens Rea
o Intended to help person
o Intended the crime (mens rea required by statute)
1.
Natural and Probable Consequences Doctrine
Statutes allow conviction if what happens is a reasonably foreseeable
consequence, even in absence of intent to commit the crime. 1) Actor
intended to promote primary crime and 2) Commission of secondary crime
was a foreseeable consequence. Analysis: 1) Primary party committed target
offense, 2) Secondary party was accomplice, 3) another crime occurred, 4)
crime was foreseeable.
2.
Principal is Acquitted
There must have been a criminal offense committed by a principal. Even if
the principal is not caught, accomplice can be convicted. An accomplice can
also get nailed for a higher standard of liability.
3.
Principal Convicted
Accomplice can get convicted of higher crime because of mens rea
differences.
4.
Limits to Accomplice Liability
Victim cannot be an accomplice.
Accomplice can get cold feet and 1) terminate complicity, wholly depriving
complicity of effectiveness, 2) gives timely warning to authorities, 3)
expresses over disapproval in time to make a difference.
Page 10 of 18
VIII.
Inchoate Crimes
Solicitation, Conspiracy, and Attempt are basically inchoate crimes. Policy is in favor of
punishing people for inchoate crimes because the conduct indicates they will cause trouble
and you cannot just let people free because they got lucky.
Generally, there needs to be both actus reus (beyond preparation and into attempt) and
mens rea (requiring both intent to perform actus reus and intent to commit the crime
itself.
If A solicits B to murder someone, but B does not, A is guilty of solicitation. If B kills or
attempts to murder C, A is guilty of murder or attempted murder. If B agrees, but is arrested
before attempt, A and B may be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit murder.
A.
Solicitation
Punishment is lower than for attempt. Some jurisdictions can punish solicitation for
murder as high as murder. Under common law had more to do with bribery, etc.
The actus reus is communication that another commit a crime.
The mens rea is specific intent to commit crime and knowledge that crime can be
accomplished.
Under common law, if it does not reach target, it has not occurred. Under MPC,
conduct designed to effect communication is sufficient. There is no such thing as
attempted solicitation.
B.
Conspiracy
Conspiracy is an agreement to commit a crime. The only way to really prove
conspiracy is through circumstantial evidence of acts. The idea that people are
working in groups to plan bad things is scary, so we want to discourage that.
You can prove with:
 Association with alleged conspirators
 Knowledge of the commission of the crime
 Presence at the scene of the crime
 Participation in the object of the conspiracy
1.
Mens Rea
Intent to agree and intent to perform crime.
2.
Actus Reus
Overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy and/or two people conspiring to
commit a crime or to do a lawful act that is corrupt or immoral. Aiding and
abetting or mere presence does not show conspiracy. (The rape case)
Page 11 of 18
Distinguish between accomplices and conspirators. Accomplice liability is
about committing the crime. Conspiracy is about planning to commit the
crime.
3.
Common Law
No merger and Pinkerton Doctrine
4.
MPC
Merger. No Pinkerton Doctrine
5.
Pinkerton Doctrine
Parties to conspiracy are responsible for any criminal act that any partner
does in furtherance of the agreement that was in scope of agreement and was
a foreseeable consequence.
6.
Bilateral v. Unilateral
The MPC requires only that the person agree with someone to do a crime.
This is interpreted as requiring only unilateral conspiracy. However, some
states may require bilateral conspiracy.
7.
Scope of Agreement
Wheel conspiracy involves a central person who independently conspires
with lots of people for lots of crimes. A prosecutor does not like this very
much because they cannot get the conspirators to testify against each other in
a hearsay. In a chain conspiracy, conspirators can hearsay each other.
Also, courts hold that one agreement is one agreement and one conviction
for conspiracy even if they are doing lots of crimes in the process. However,
there can be multiple convictions if there are separate conspiracy statutes.
8.
Defenses
 Wharton’s Rule: The common law does not have merger. When a
crime requires multiple people, there can be no conspiracy.
 Protected Class: If one party cannot agree to something, they
cannot be held to have agreed to a conspiracy.
 Abandonment/Renunciation: Complete withdrawal not caused by
fear or inability. Also requires an affirmative act including preventing
or warning authorities, preventing being the majority.
 Withdrawal: You can withdraw after agreement, but you can be held
liable for the conspiracy and not the crimes.
Page 12 of 18
C.
Attempt
People who attempt stuff are guilty and should be punished. Punishing attempts will
also discourage people. You usually get punished half, but it is still a felony.
Attempt was formerly a misdemeanor, but now it is a felony punishable almost
equally with the actual crime.
Preparation v. attempt:
 Person has done everything in power to commit crime
 Some appreciable fragment of the crime has been committed
 Slight acts done in addition to preparation
 Some act done with intent even if innocent without attempt counts
 More serious crime = earlier attempt sets in
1.
Mens Rea
 Intend to perform actus reus
 Intend to perform crime
2.
Actus Reus
 Last Act: All acts performed that actor believes are necessary. Most
jurisdictions think this is too late. (Murderer has pulled the trigger.)
 Physical Proximity: The actor has the ability to complete the crime
almost immediately.
 Dangerous Proximity: Similar to above, but you balance the
seriousness of the crime, likelihood of the crime, and proximity to
the crime.
 Indispensable Element: Is there any central part of the crime over
which the actor does not have control yet? No gun, no murder.
 Probable Desistance: Has actor reached a point where it is unlikely
they will voluntarily stop.
 Res Ipsa Loquitor: Does the actor’s conduct unambiguously
manifest criminal attempt? Would a person act this way without
crime?
 Substantial Step: Are the materials needed near the crime scene?
MPC
A complete attempt is where they accomplish everything, but somehow, it does not
work. An incomplete attempt is where the actor performs some of the necessary
acts, but stops is stopped.
Page 13 of 18
Punishment is half, 1st degree is 2nd degree.
This is not recklessly or negligently stuff on mens rea.
There is no such thing as attempted felony murder.
3.
MPC 5.01
A person is guilty of an attempt to commit a crime if, acting with the kind of
culpability otherwise required for commission of the crime, he:
(a) purposely engages in conduct which would constitute the crime if the
attendant circumstances were as he believes them to be; or
(b) when causing a particular result is an element of the crime, does or omits
to do anything with the purpose of causing or with the belief that it will cause
such result without further conduct on his part; or
(c) purposely does or omits to do anything which, under the circumstances as
he believes them to be, is an act or omission constituting a substantial step in
a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime.
4.
5.
Defenses
a)
Impossibility
 Factual: There is a factual circumstance unknown to the
person at the time. (Pickpocket finds an empty pocket.)
 Legal:
o Pure: The law does not recognize what would have
happened as being a crime.
o Hybrid: Goal is illegal, but factually not possible.
Some mistake makes the real crime impossible.
b)
Abandonment
Some states have this, others do not.
 Must be voluntary (cannot be some sort of factor where you
saw a cop)
 Must be complete (there must be complete abandonment
with no intent to perform crime in the future)
 Must prevent commission of crime, or make effort.
Assault
 Intent to commit battery
 Scare person
 Battery sometimes called assault
Page 14 of 18
IX.
Larceny
Actus Reus: Trespassory taking (meat barrels) without consent and carrying away of
personal property of another person with
Mens Rea: intent to permanently deprive owner of it. (borrow bike)
Custody: Physical control for limited time and purpose. (In armored car robbery, it was
important that person had custody rather than possession.)
Possession: Control with intent to possess with right to exclude.
Constructive Possession: Legal fiction where law deems person to possess something
because they have some legal interest.
Owner: Person with title
Larceny by Trick: Obtain possession by trick or fraud. (Person rents horse with intention
to steal it.)
Abandoned Property: If person finding property does not take reasonable steps to find
owner and has intent to steal, busted.
X.
Embezzlement
Conversion of property received by wrongdoer in a non-trespassory manner. Entrustment,
conversion, fraud.
XI.
False Pretenses
Obtains possession through false representation and with intent to steal and title to the
property. The victim must intend for the title to pass. The person must have made a false
representation. The person must have relied on it. (Doesn’t work if person knew false, relied
on other advice, relied on other true reps)
XII.
Defense Categories
 Failure of Proof
 Justification
 Excuses
A.




Self Defense—A Justification
Imminent threat
Proportionate
Necessary to save one's self
Reasonable (objective and subjective)
Page 15 of 18
B.
1.
MPC 3.04
Use of force justifiable when actor believes that such force is immediately
necessary to protect against the use of unlawful force (death, serious harm,
kidnapping, rape, etc.)
Limitations on Justifying:
 To resist arrest that person knows is being made by peace officer
 To resist force used by property owner or agent under claim.
. Except:
 Provoking the deadly force doesn't get you off.
 Knowledge that you can avoid necessity of using such force with
complete safety, or by surrendering something person asserts a claim
to. But not obliged to retreat from dwelling or place of work, or
retreat from law enforcement duty
2.
Rule of Aggressor
Deadly aggressor has no right of self-defense unless withdraws from the fight
and informs opponent of withdrawal. (CC and MPC) An aggression is an
affirmative, unlawful act reasonably calculated to induce a public fight.
3.
Duty to Retreat (Common Law)
Apparently, you should retreat to wall, unless your home is your castle.
(Castle Exception--got to be in the castle or in the space around home02).
Retreat if you can do so safely. (Stand your Ground v. Duty to Retreat.)
Defense of Others, Property
Generally, defenders have same rights as the other person would have.
1.
Defense of Property
Can't be using deadly force to prevent theft, though in some places, you can
use non-deadly force to prevent imminent, unlawful theft. You may use
deadly force to defend home.
C.
Necessity
 Act done to prevent a significant evil
 No adequate/legal alternative
 Harm caused must not have been disproportionate to harm avoided. It was the
lesser of two evils.
D.
Duress
Immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury
Well-grounded fear that the threat will be carried out
No reasonable opportunity to escape the threatened harm.



1.
Prison Escape
 Prisoner faced with a specific threat of death, sexual attack, or injury in
immediate future.
Page 16 of 18




E.
No time for a complaint to authorities or there exists a history of futile
complaints
No time or opportunity to resort to the courts
No evidence of force or violence used toward innocent persons in the
escape.
Prisoner immediately reports to the proper authorities when he has
attained a position of safety from immediate threat.
Intoxication
1.



Voluntary (Not Necessarily Widely Adopted)
Failure of proof
o Involuntary act (rare) (so drunk, body moved in crazy way)
o No mens rea (specific intent crimes)
Excuse (not common)
Insanity (form of temporary insanity, some courts, or permanent if you're
completely toasted.)
MPC: Intoxication not a defense unless is negatives an element of the offense.
Intoxication not self-induced (involuntary) or pathological is an affirmative
defense if actor lacked capacity to appreciate criminal conduct or conform.
Reckless doesn't matter if you're too drunk to realize recklessness.
2.
XIII.
Involuntary (Broadly allowed, rarely invoked)
 Coerced ingestion
 Accidental ingestion
 Prescribed medication
 Pathological intoxication
Insanity
A.
The M'Naghten Rule:
Person is insane when they have a defect of reason from disease of mind: (squeezes
someone's skull thinking it was a grapefruit)
 party was laboring under defect of reason as to not know the nature and quality
of the act he was doing,
 AND/OR if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was
wrong.
B.
Irresistible Impulse or Control Test
Complete destruction of the governing power of the mind. (They would do it, even
if a police officer was watching.)
Page 17 of 18
C.
Durham Product Test
Act was a product of a mental disease or mental defect. This allegedly lead to too
many acquittal
D.
MPC Test:
Two circumstances:
1. When as a result of mental disease or defect the defendant lacked substantial
capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct.
2. When as a result of mental disease or defect the defendant lacked substantial
capacity to conform his conduct to the requirements of law.
E.
Diminished Capacity
1. Mens Rea Variant: You attack the prosecution on the mens rea proof.
2. Partial Responsibility Variant: Person claims less culpability.
Page 18 of 18