Criminal Law: Mens Rea - Strict Liability & Intoxication

Strict Liability

Presumption in favor of scienter: congress intends to require a defendant to possess a culpable mental state regarding “each of the statutory elements that criminalize otherwise innocent conduct”

Exception: Often declined in statutory provisions forming part of a regulatory or public welfare program that only carries minor penalties

Note: Mens rea = scienter

Intoxication & Drugged Condition: Common Law

Voluntary intoxication is relevant to negate specific intent crimes but not general intent crimes

Intoxication & Drugged Condition: MPC

• Voluntary intoxication is used to negate an element of the crime; it is not an affirmative defense

• However, involuntary intoxication is an affirmative defense

• When recklessness establishes an element of the crime, and the defendant who, due to self-induced intoxication is unaware of a risk of which he would have been aware had he been sober, his unawareness is immaterial

Legislative

Makes statutes congress can amend

Justices agree that legislatures have the authority to enact strict liability statutes;

question is whether a statute not explicitly containing a mens rea term is such a statute or not

Separate those who

do and don’t act knowingly

Exceptions of Scienter - How do I determine what is an action that is General Intent or Specific Intent?

General: don’t have mental state to do a crime

Specific: Do have mental state to do a crime