Legal Term Meaning Mens Rea

A bona fide belief that a law is unjust or unconstitutional is not an excuse, but “reasonable reliance on an official legal statement that is subsequently found to be invalid or erroneous” is not a criminal offence. Here, the test is both subjective and objective. There is credible subjective evidence that the defendant neither foresaw nor desired the particular result, which may exclude both intent and recklessness. But a reasonable person with the same abilities and skills as the defendant would have foreseen and taken precautions to avoid loss and damage. Only a small percentage of crimes are defined by this mens rea requirement. Most legislators prefer to base liability on intent or recklessness, and given the need to establish recklessness as the default mens rea for guilt, those practicing in most jurisdictions rely heavily on objective criteria to establish the minimum foresight requirement for recklessness. Many criminal laws require a person to “knowingly” engage in illegal activities. The part of the crime that must be committed knowingly depends on the crime. For example, a drug trafficking law could require the person to “knowingly” import an illegal drug into the United States. If the defendant had received a gift to deliver to someone in the United States and he honestly did not know that the gift contained an illegal drug, then mens rea or necessary mental state was not established and no crime had been committed.

The concept of actus reus is quite simple. If someone commits a crime, then he commits an illegal act (by conspiracy, as mentioned earlier, the illegal act is the agreement). So it`s clear that you have to do something – or actus reus – to commit a crime. For drug offenses in Ohio, the mens rea required is usually “know.” This means that you cannot be convicted of a drug-related crime by a court unless the prosecutor proves that you “knowingly” acted in the drug-related crime. In a previous chapter, we provided the legal definition of “knowingly.” To repeat briefly, “knowingly” engaging in a drug-related crime means that you knew you were possessing or selling controlled substances. The vast majority of law enforcement in the United States is conducted by the various states in accordance with the laws of that state. Historically, states (with the partial exception of Louisiana civil law) applied common law rules of mens rea, similar to those that existed in England, but over time the American understanding of common law mens rea differed from that of English law and from each other. From the late 1950s to the early 1960s, the common law of men was widely recognized as a slippery, vague and confusing mess. [8] This is one of the many factors that led to the development of the Model Penal Code. Learn more about FindLaw`s newsletters, including our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. As you can see, mens rea involves many complexities and subtle differences.

If you are defending yourself against criminal charges, you need a defense lawyer who fully understands the complexity of your case. The standard test of criminal responsibility at common law is expressed in the Latin phrase actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, that is, “the act is guilty only if reason is guilty”. [1] As a general rule, a person who acted without intellectual fault is not criminally liable. The exceptions are the so-called strict liability offences. If a person intends to harm, but due to a wrong purpose or other cause, the intent is transferred from a targeted victim to an unintentional victim, the case is considered a matter of transferred intent. [2]: 63-64 Thus, a deliberate crime would carry a heavier penalty than if the perpetrator had acted knowingly, recklessly or negligently. The OAG has greatly influenced the penal codes of a number of states and continues to be influential in promoting the discourse on mens rea. Most crimes require what lawyers call “mens rea,” which in Latin means “guilty mind.” In other words, what was the mental state of the accused and what was the intention of the accused when the crime was committed.

Mens rea allows the criminal justice system to distinguish between a person who did not intend to commit a crime and a person who intentionally wanted to commit a crime. Mens rea levels and the distinction between them vary from one province or territory to another. Although the common law originated in England, the common law of each jurisdiction varies in terms of guilt, as precedents and statutes vary. Created by FindLaw`s team of writers and legal writers| Last updated February 12, 2019 Thus, the actus reus and mens rea of homicide in a modern penal code can be considered as follows: Today, most crimes, including common law crimes, are defined by statutes that usually contain a word or phrase indicating the requirement of mens rea. For example, a typical law may require a person to act knowingly, intentionally, or recklessly. The motive cannot be a defence. For example, if a person breaks into a laboratory used to study drugs on animals, the question of guilt is determined by the presence of an actus reus, that is.