{"id":1276,"date":"2017-09-27T17:43:55","date_gmt":"2017-09-27T17:43:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/?post_type=chapter&p=1276"},"modified":"2017-10-02T18:07:55","modified_gmt":"2017-10-02T18:07:55","slug":"9-7-end-of-chapter-material","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/chapter\/9-7-end-of-chapter-material\/","title":{"raw":"9.7 End-of-Chapter Material","rendered":"9.7 End-of-Chapter Material"},"content":{"raw":"
\r\n

Summary<\/h4>\r\n

Homicide is the killing of one human being by another. Criminal homicide is either murder or manslaughter. Some states and the federal government also criminalize the killing of a fetus. Suicide is usually not criminal, although assisted suicide could be.<\/p>\r\n

Many jurisdictions follow the common law and define murder as the killing of a victim with malice aforethought. Malice can be either a specific intent to kill, which is express malice, or the intent to do serious bodily injury, or depraved heart, which is implied malice. The Model Penal Code defines murder intent as purposely, knowingly, or recklessly under circumstances indicating extreme indifference to life. A killing by the transmission of AIDS can either be murder, if the transmission is deliberate, or manslaughter, if the transmission is inadvertent.<\/p>\r\n

Most jurisdictions divide murder into degrees of seriousness. First-degree murder is the most serious, can merit the death penalty in certain jurisdictions, and generally includes premeditated murder, murder by a specified means, and serious felony murders. Premeditated murder is typically a killing supported by specific intent to kill combined with cool reflection and planning. Murder by a specified means is killing with a specific heinous method. Felony murder is a homicide that occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a felony. Felony murder lacks murder intent; the defendant need only possess the intent required for the felony. Felony murder can be graded as first, second, or third degree, depending on the felony. The Model Penal Code classifies all murders as first-degree felonies.<\/p>\r\n

Second-degree murder is often defined as any murder that is not first degree. Typically, second-degree murder intent is the intent to inflict serious bodily injury or a depraved heart intent. Second-degree murder is usually graded lower than first-degree murder but higher than manslaughter.<\/p>\r\n

In many jurisdictions, manslaughter is an unlawful killing without murder intent. Most jurisdictions divide manslaughter into voluntary and involuntary. The Model Penal Code classifies all manslaughters as felonies of the second degree. Voluntary manslaughter is a killing that occurs during a heat of passion inspired by adequate provocation from the victim, negating murder intent. Involuntary manslaughter can be a killing that occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a misdemeanor or a reckless or negligent killing, depending on the jurisdiction. Involuntary manslaughter can also be vehicular manslaughter when the killing occurs while driving a vehicle recklessly, negligently, or under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The Model Penal Code classifies negligent killings as negligent homicide and a felony of the third degree.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n

You Be the Judge<\/h3>\r\n

Read the prompt and then decide whether you would affirm<\/strong> or reverse<\/strong> the lower court. Review the case and see how the judges or justices actually ruled. Check your answers using the answer key at the end of the chapter.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n \t
  1. The defendant shot and killed his ex-girlfriend, who was pregnant. The defendant did not know she was pregnant, nor was it obvious from her appearance. The lower court reversed a jury verdict of second-degree murder of the fetus, and the prosecution appealed. Would you affirm<\/strong> or reverse<\/strong>? People v. Taylor<\/em>, 86 P.3d 881 (2004). The case is available at this link: http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/data2\/californiastatecases\/s112443.pdf<\/a>.<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. The defendant held his wife and two small children hostage at gunpoint in a train compartment for three days. The wife died of a bullet wound and one of the children died of dehydration. The defendant was convicted of first-degree murder for the child\u2019s death, based on the specified means of \u201cstarvation.\u201d The defendant appealed because there was no evidence<\/em> of specific intent to kill<\/em> the child. Would you affirm<\/strong> or reverse<\/strong>? State v. Evangelista<\/em>, 353 S.E.2d 375 (1987). The case is available at this link: http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=587685537389879135&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr<\/a>.<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. The defendant was charged with felony murder for the death of his girlfriend\u2019s mother. The underlying felony was cruelty to an elderly person. The defendant and his girlfriend had removed the victim from an assisted living facility so that they could control her Social Security checks. Thereafter, they neglected to care for her and she died from this neglect. The defendant claimed that he had no duty of care<\/em> for his girlfriend\u2019s mother<\/em>. The lower court denied his motion for a new trial. Would you affirm<\/strong> or reverse<\/strong>? Wood v. State<\/em>, 620 S.E.2d 348 (2005). The case is available at this link: http:\/\/law.justia.com\/cases\/georgia\/supreme-court\/2005\/s05a0839-1.html<\/a>.<\/li>\r\n \t
  4. The defendant held the victim, his ex-wife, hostage in her home with a gun. When an oil truck pulled into her driveway, she smirked at the defendant because she knew the confrontation was over. The defendant shot and killed her and claimed that the smirk<\/em> was adequate provocation<\/em>. The court held that the defendant was not entitled to a jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter. Would you affirm<\/strong> or reverse<\/strong>? State v. Warmke<\/em>, 879 A.2d 30 (2005). The case is available at this link: http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=7047276887490940793&q=State+v.+Warmke,+879+A.2d+30+%282005%29.&hl =en&as_sdt=2,6&as_vis=1<\/a>.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
    \r\n

    Cases of Interest<\/h4>\r\n