2: Criminal Intent, Parties to Criminal Acts, and Attempts to Commit Crimes
- Page ID
- 69129
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\dsum}{\displaystyle\sum\limits} \)
\( \newcommand{\dint}{\displaystyle\int\limits} \)
\( \newcommand{\dlim}{\displaystyle\lim\limits} \)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)
\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)
\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\(\newcommand{\longvect}{\overrightarrow}\)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\(\newcommand{\ket}[1]{\left| #1 \right>}\)
\(\newcommand{\bra}[1]{\left< #1 \right|}\)
\(\newcommand{\braket}[2]{\left< #1 \vphantom{#2} \right| \left. #2 \vphantom{#1} \right>}\)
\(\newcommand{\braopket}[3]{\left< #1 \vphantom{#2}\vphantom{#3} \right| #2 \vphantom{#1}\vphantom{#3} \left| #3 \vphantom{#1}\vphantom{#2} \right>}\)
\(\newcommand{\qmvec}[1]{\mathbf{\vec{#1}}}\)
\(\newcommand{\op}[1]{\hat{\mathbf{#1}}}\)
\(\newcommand{\expect}[1]{\langle #1 \rangle}\)
\(\newcommand{\dfn}[1]{\emph{\textbf{#1}}}\)
- Dissect the types of criminal intent.
- Understand the legal concept of motive.
- Explain the difference between an accomplice and an accessory.
- Explore the crime of attempt.
- 2.1: Types of Intent
- This page discusses criminal intent, or mens rea, as a vital element in defining crimes under common law. It differentiates between various types of intent, such as malice aforethought, specific intent, and general intent. The page also explains the concept of transferred intent, where a defendant's intent towards one victim can be applied to another, allowing multiple charges in cases of differing intended and actual victims.
- 2.2: Motive
- This page distinguishes between intent and motive in criminal law, explaining that intent is crucial for proving mens rea, while motive reflects the reasons behind a crime. The example of Isabella illustrates that her revenge motive does not negate her intent to kill Ignatius. Although she can be convicted of murder, her motive may impact sentencing. Therefore, while motive is relevant during trials, it cannot replace the necessity of intent in determining guilt.
- 2.3: Parties to Criminal Acts
- This page explores the roles and legal responsibilities of accomplices and accessories in criminal activity, highlighting their degrees of liability. It contrasts historical and modern definitions, emphasizing that accomplices share equal liability with the principal offender. The page discusses required criminal acts and intent for accomplices and differentiates them from accessories, who are guilty of separate offenses related to aiding after a crime.
- 2.4: Attempts to Commit Crimes
- This page discusses the evolution of criminal law regarding attempts, noting that early English common law did not recognize attempts as crimes. Over time, certain severe attempts became misdemeanors, and modern jurisdictions often criminalize attempts through general or specific statutes.
- 2.5: Proximity Test
- This page discusses the proximity test, which evaluates a defendant's progress in committing a crime based on the distance remaining to complete the offense. It emphasizes actions left to take rather than those already completed and indicates that in some jurisdictions, clear intent may lessen the need for proximity.
- 2.6: Res Ipsa Loquitur Test
- This page explains the legal doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which assesses a defendant's intent based on their actions during a crime. It emphasizes that clear intent must be evidenced through behavior. An example is given involving a character named Harry, who seeks a hit man to kill his wife. His actions exemplify the criteria for res ipsa loquitur, suggesting he has committed attempted murder, even without further evidence.
- 2.7: Probable Desistance Test
- This page discusses the probable desistance test, which assesses a defendant's progress toward committing a crime. It defines an attempt as when an individual is unlikely to desist without external intervention. The illustration of Judy preparing to steal from a jewelry store, who takes significant steps before police interruption, exemplifies this concept. Her actions indicate she crossed a point of no return, meeting the criteria for attempted larceny and burglary.
- 2.8: Chapter Summary
- This page covers the classification of criminal intents, including malice aforethought, specific, and general intent, and clarifies the legal distinctions between accomplices and accessories. It explains two types of attempt statutes and mentions that some states do not classify attempts as a crime. Additionally, it outlines four tests for assessing attempted criminal acts: proximity, res ipsa loquitur, probable desistance, and the substantial steps test based on the Model Penal Code.

