Mens Rea and Mistake: every key term you need (+ practice quiz)
25 flashcard terms for Criminal Law Topic 3, written to match the course framework. Study them here, then drill them as interactive flashcards, or test yourself with the 15-question quiz — free, no account needed.
The culpable mental state a statute requires as to each material element of an offense; modern usage refers to the specific state of mind demanded rather than a general notion of wickedness.
Purposely
Under the Model Penal Code an actor acts purposely as to a result or conduct when it is a conscious object to engage in that conduct or cause that result.
Knowingly
An actor acts knowingly as to conduct or circumstances when aware they exist, and as to a result when aware it is practically certain to follow from the conduct.
Recklessly
An actor consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk, and the disregard is a gross deviation from the standard a law-abiding person would observe.
Negligently in criminal law
An actor should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk, and the failure to perceive it is a gross deviation from the care a reasonable person would use.
Default culpability rule
Where a statute is silent as to the mental state for a material element, the Model Penal Code supplies purpose, knowledge, or recklessness, and recklessness is the practical floor.
Element analysis
The approach of asking separately which mental state applies to each conduct, circumstance, and result element, rather than assigning one mental state to the whole offense.
Specific intent
A common law category describing offenses that require an intent beyond the conduct itself, such as intent to permanently deprive in larceny or intent to commit a felony inside in burglary.
General intent
A common law category requiring only an intent to perform the prohibited act, without proof of any further purpose, as in battery or common law rape.
Willful blindness
Deliberately avoiding confirmation of a suspected fact; courts treat contrived ignorance as satisfying knowledge where the defendant believed there was a high probability and took steps to avoid learning.
Global-Tech standard
The Supreme Court described willful blindness as requiring a subjectively high probability belief plus deliberate action to avoid learning the truth, which is more than recklessness.
Transferred intent
Where a defendant intends harm to one victim but injures another, the required intent carries over to the unintended victim so that liability tracks the intended offense.
Regina v. Cunningham
Malice was read to mean actual foresight of the particular kind of harm, so a man who tore out a gas meter was not liable absent awareness of the risk of poisoning.
People v. Conley
Intent to cause permanent disability could be inferred from the character of the attack and the surrounding circumstances, since direct proof of a mental state is rarely available.
Strict liability offense
A crime requiring no culpable mental state as to at least one material element, common in public welfare and regulatory settings with light penalties.
Public welfare offense
A regulatory crime involving dangerous products or activities where the legislature dispenses with fault to encourage exacting care by those who enter the regulated field.
United States v. Balint
A narcotics seller was convicted without proof that he knew the drugs were covered by the statute, illustrating early acceptance of strict liability in regulatory crimes.
Morissette v. United States
The Court refused to read out the mental state from a theft statute derived from the common law, insisting that silence does not eliminate intent for traditional crimes.
Staples v. United States
Because the firearms statute carried a heavy penalty and reached items in innocent hands, the Court required knowledge of the features making the weapon automatic.
Mistake of fact
A mistaken belief about a factual element that negates the required mental state; under the Model Penal Code any honest mistake negating the element defeats liability.
Reasonableness limit on mistake
At common law a mistake of fact excused only if reasonable for general intent crimes, while any honest mistake could negate a specific intent element.
Moral wrong doctrine
A limit denying the mistake defense where, on the facts as the defendant believed them, the conduct was still immoral, as in cases involving young victims.
Legal wrong doctrine
A limit convicting the defendant of the greater offense actually committed where the facts as believed would still have been criminal, though a lesser crime.
Mistake of law
Ignorance of the criminal prohibition ordinarily provides no defense, though it may negate liability where the statute requires knowledge of the law or where an element depends on other law.
Cheek v. United States
Because the tax offenses required willfulness, a genuine even if unreasonable belief that the law imposed no duty could negate that element, though disagreement with the law could not.