Massachusetts Law School 1L Study Guide for Criminal Law

Massachusetts Law School 1L Study Guide for Criminal Law

I. Overview of Criminal Law in Massachusetts

Criminal law deals with behaviors that are sanctioned under the criminal code and other penal statutes. It involves the prohibition of certain actions deemed harmful to individuals and society, prescribing penalties for the commission of such acts. In Massachusetts, the principles of criminal liability, defenses, and the processes of the criminal justice system are rooted in both statutory law and common law.

II. Actus Reus (Guilty Act)

The actus reus is a fundamental element of criminal liability. It refers to the voluntary physical act, unlawful omission, or state of being that is prohibited by law.

  • Commonwealth v. Welansky (1944): This case illustrates the concept of actus reus through omission and the duty to act. The owner of the Cocoanut Grove nightclub was held criminally liable for the deaths resulting from a fire because he failed to take safety precautions.

III. Mens Rea (Guilty Mind)

Mens rea refers to the mental component of a defendant’s intent to commit a crime or their knowledge that their actions were wrong.

  • Commonwealth v. Latimore (1980): This case emphasized that when evaluating mens rea, the court must consider whether the defendant acted with the level of intent required by the specific crime.

IV. Strict Liability Offenses

Strict liability offenses do not require mens rea. The mere act of committing the offense is enough to warrant a conviction.

  • Commonwealth v. Koczwara (1959): This case demonstrates that Massachusetts recognizes strict liability offenses, particularly in regulatory contexts or where the protection of public welfare is paramount.

V. Causation

Causation is the link between the defendant’s conduct and the resulting harm. It includes both factual causation (‘but for’ the defendant’s actions, the harm would not have occurred) and legal causation (proximate cause).

  • Commonwealth v. Rhoades (1989): This case deals with the issues of causation in a scenario where the defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm.

VI. Homicide

Homicide in Massachusetts is classified into murder (first and second degree) and manslaughter (voluntary and involuntary).

  • Commonwealth v. Webster (1850): This case provides foundational jurisprudence for the elements of murder, particularly the deliberation and premeditation required for first-degree murder.

VII. Defenses to Criminal Liability

Defenses in criminal law negate elements of a crime, such as self-defense, duress, and insanity.

  • Commonwealth v. McHoul (1967): Adopted the Model Penal Code’s approach to insanity, which focuses on whether the defendant lacked substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct or to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law.

VIII. Attempt

An attempt is an act done with the intent to commit a crime that falls short of the crime’s completion.

  • Commonwealth v. Peaslee (1901): This case discussed the legal threshold for what constitutes an attempt, detailing the requirement for a ‘dangerous proximity to success’.

IX. Accomplice Liability

Accomplice liability holds individuals liable for crimes they helped others commit, even if they did not directly engage in the act.

  • Commonwealth v. Richards (1986): The court held that an accomplice must share the intent to commit the offense and engage in some affirmative act aiding the principal.

X. Conspiracy

Conspiracy occurs when two or more persons agree to commit a criminal act or to achieve a legal end by unlawful means.

  • Commonwealth v. Beneficial Finance Co. (1971): Defines the elements of conspiracy in Massachusetts and the requirement of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

XI. Theories of Punishment

Massachusetts recognizes various theories of punishment, including retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation.

  • Commonwealth v. Perry (1997): The case discusses the application of different theories of punishment in sentencing, underlining the discretion afforded to judges.

XII. Sentencing and Punishment

Sentencing considerations in Massachusetts involve statutory guidelines, mitigating and aggravating factors, and the concept of proportionality.

  • Commonwealth v. Tirrell (1999): This case discusses the principles of proportionality in sentencing and the appropriate balance between the severity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty.

XIII. Juvenile Justice

Massachusetts law addresses juvenile offenders differently from adults, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.

  • Commonwealth v. Quincy Q. (2013): This case examines juvenile justice procedures and the protections afforded to juvenile offenders under Massachusetts law.

This study guide has covered the fundamental concepts, landmark cases, and applicable laws in Massachusetts Criminal Law. To prepare for the final semester exam, students should review these topics in detail, understand the nuances of each case, and know how to apply the IRAC method to new factual scenarios.

Discover more from Legal Three

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading