1. LS507 Understanding Criminal Responsibility Mistake Unit 4 Dr. Christie L. Richardson Kaplan University

2. Mistake Have you ever made a mistake? Of course. 2 Types of Mistakes –Factual –Legal Ignorance of the Law –Defendant does know that a particular act is criminal. Mistake of Law –Defendants rely on their own understanding of the law, which most of the time is not a good thing. –Defendant knows that there is a law applying to the area of activity, but believes that the law does not cover his particular act.

3. Exceptions to the Rule Ignorantia Lex (Doctrine of Ignorance) Specific Intent Crimes –Mistake of law that no matter how unreasonable, would be a valid “defense” to a specific intent crime. For example, larceny/theft. Noncriminal Law Mistake –Defendant may be mistaken not as to the criminal law, but as to a part of the civil law that is incorporated in the criminal law. Estoppel –Defendant relies explicitly on the advice of a government official in charge of a particular activity. –Government may then be “estopped” to prosecute. The Cultural Defense –The United States has been a melting pot of cultures; therefore, not everyone knows a nation’s laws. These defenses are not to get rid of a charge, but they are taken into consideration by the prosecutor and/or judge.

4. Mistake of Fact A lack of knowledge of a particular piece of information, which may be a defense if it negates a material element of the offense. Specific Intent –A defendant is not guilty of an offense if his mistake of fact negates the specific-intent portion of the crime, i.e., if he lacks the intent designated in the definition of the offense, e.g., "knowingly," "negligently," "recklessly.” Sound familiar?

5. Mistake of Fact General Intent –Reasonableness The ordinary rule is that a person is not guilty of a general- intent crime if his mistake of fact was reasonable, but he is guilty if his mistake was unreasonable. –Moral Wrong Doctrine One can make a reasonable mistake regarding an attendant circumstance and yet manifest a bad character or otherwise demonstrate worthiness of punishment. The rule is generally that there is no exculpation for mistakes where, if the facts had been as the defendant believed them to be, his conduct would still be immoral.

6. Mistake of Fact –Legal-Wrong Doctrine Less extreme alternative No exculpation for mistakes where, if the facts were as the defendant thought them to be, his conduct would still be "illegal.” Often this means that a defendant possessed the mens rea for committing a lesser offense, but the actus reus was associated with a higher offense. Under this doctrine, the defendant is guilty of the higher offense in such circumstances.

7. Mistake of Law A lack of knowledge of a particular law, which may be a defense if it negates the mens rea required for the crime. Suppose a defendant being prosecuted for bigamy claims that he believed he had obtained a legally valid divorce before remarrying. Is he mistaken about the fact of whether he is still married to his first spouse, or is he mistaken about his legal status as a married or single person?

8. Model Penal Code Section 2.04(1) Mistakes of law and fact may be treated in the same manner: a mistake of either type is a valid defense if it negates a material element of the offense. Knowledge is a necessary element of the crime of bigamy. The courts’ rejection of ignorance of the law defenses is sometimes based on the assertion that “every person is presumed to know the law.”

9. Model Penal Code Section 2.04(2) Exception –The defense of mistake-of-fact is not available if the defendant would be guilty of another offense, had the circumstances been as he supposed. –In such cases, contrary to the common law, the Code only permits punishment at the level of the lesser offense.

10. Town Hall Meeting Is it fair to punish someone who committed a crime after his lawyers and government officials told him that his actions were legal? Is it fair to punish someone who believes he is buying sugar but has actually purchased cocaine? Would you consider it fair if you were punished while in another country for engaging in an activity that would be legal in the United States?