Causation

The midterm exams have been graded but not yet totaled.
- Students will receive their exams back tomorrow.
- Individual emails will be sent with scanned midterm exams.
- Email will also include the median score and a link for booking office hours to discuss results.
Note that most students identified crimes effectively, though some misidentified actions as crimes.
Physical handouts of the exams are optional and will be available on Wednesday.

Students will use an exam number for the final exam, generated by ExamSoft.
After grading the finals, the instructor will provide the list of exam numbers.
Comments on exams will be limited; many will be check marks indicating correct identification, but some written comments will also be included.
The instructor will finalize grading after reviewing exams one more time tonight.

Causation is considered the least favorite part of criminal law for some students.
Causation in criminal law shares some similarities with tort law but differs in significance and consequences.
Tort law emphasizes civil liabilities, whereas criminal law focuses on moral condemnation and potential for imprisonment.

Actual Causation: Refers to whether the defendant’s actions actually contributed to the result ("but for" causation).
Proximate Causation: Deals with foreseeability and legal implications of holding the defendant responsible.
Substantial Factor Test: Used when multiple causes may contribute to an outcome, determining if a defendant’s actions were a substantial factor in causing the result.

Both actual and proximate causation must be established for criminal liability.
The "but for" test can create issues of oversimplification (e.g., everything can be traced back to being born) and complexity when multiple causes exist.
Actual causation question: Did the defendant's act contribute to the resulting harm?

Example Case:
- Scenario: A woman at a music festival ducks under an entry gate, taking a drink from a table, leading to a bizarre chain of events.
- Discussion revolves around whether she can be charged with felony murder.
- Actions examined include: illegality of entry (burglary), theft (larceny), or any potential force or threat involved.
- Conclusion: With qualifying felonies excluded, felony murder cannot be charged.

Felony murder is a strict liability offense where a defendant can be liable for homicide without intent, provided a death occurs during the commission of a felony.
Logical Nexus Test: Determines if the death occurred as part of the felony’s acts, maintaining an immediate connection.
Discussion:
- Court rulings have clarified the necessity for causal connections in felony murder cases.
- Causation in the context of homicide must demonstrate a direct, foreseeable link to the crime.

In a case where a stairway struggle leads to a death, the offender's conduct must be examined for direct causation, especially when individuals are involved in joint criminal enterprises.
Use of agency theory: Actions of one co-felon can be attributed to others, resulting in liability across all involved parties.

Courts examine two bifurcated aspects of causation:
1. Agency Theory considers actions attributable to co-felons.
2. Proximate Causation juxtaposes between legal accountability and societal norms.
Liability may extend to situations where collaterals (bystanders or police) incur harm during the commission of the crime.

Actual Causation: Determined by the "but for" test, asking whether the harm would have occurred without the defendant's conduct.
Substantial Factor Test: Crucial when multiple agents contribute to a harmful outcome, requiring legal interpretation of individual contributions.
Eggshell Victim Rule: Refers to the principle that defendants are liable for a victim's injuries even if a pre-existing condition that exacerbates the injury is at play.

The Model Penal Code emphasizes that actual causation is sufficient for establishing liability, positing a more lenient framework regarding proximate causes in contrast to common law.
Key elements include considerations of remote or accidental results that cannot uphold liability.

Students should prepare for final exams by engaging with practical applications of causation.
Follow the nuanced understanding of causation as it applies across varied cases and jurisdictions.
Expect a hands-on approach in final preparations with practice problems relevant to real-world scenarios discussed in class.
Additional emphasis on continuous engagement with cases where liability and causal analysis intersect to better synthesize learning for practical legal application.

Recommended discussion questions and case studies will be prepared for the upcoming sessions and will serve as a foundation for the final assessment.
Continuous updates and adjustments to reading lists should be monitored for relevance and accuracy.