1/3
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
|---|
No study sessions yet.
common law framework for parties to crimes
principal in the first degree (performs actus reus)
principal in the second degree (present during crime)
accessory before the fact
accessory after the fact
modern parties to crime
principal - same as common law
accomplice - they commit the same crime as the principal
accessory - lesser crime, assists after the fact only
vicarious liability - guilty of crime committed by another
you only have the last three if you have liability for the principal
accomplice liability (actus reus and mens rea)
AR: aiding, abetting, inciting, or encouraging to commit a crime, before or during - includes criminal omissions like duty to intervene (aka when mother found guilty of abusing her child but she didn’t touch child, she just saw and let it happen)
- words may be enough but mere presence is not (two people playing game on street, one person robs a random person, the other person flees the scene and gets arrested bc they thought he was accomplice)
MR: specific intent, knowledge is usually not sufficient (someone makes illegal gun sale to someone knowing that they are probably going to commit a crime, not accomplice bc it wasnt his INTENT to do so)
state v ulvinen (guy killed wife and his mom knew)
dude killed wife, told mom, mom helped take care of kids, washed bloody bathroom, and fabricated a story. david later confessed, and suggested mom knew he intended to kill wife. mom convicted as accomplice, appealed saying she was accessory after the fact
issue: was there sufficient evidence that she assisted before or during murder
holding: no
reasoning: the facts support, at most, accessory after the fact. she may have known about it beforehand, but this omission is not a crime and she did not participate in the murder before or during