4 Hours spent working on this :/ 1 of 4 due by midnight lol Final Exam #3 1. Issue: Whether or not Marcus is guilty of MURDER following the Model Penal Code. Murder: The unlawful killing of another human being by another human being, or a fetus with malice aforethought. Under the CA Penal Code §187-188 A person is found guilty of murder in the first degree under the following circumstances: • Willful, deliberate and premeditated. • By poison, torture, explosives or ambush • Felony murder California Uniform Determination of Death Act: Under the UDDA §7180. (a) The individual is considered to be dead if he/she has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem. And §7181 When an individual is pronounced dead by determining the individual has sustained an irreversible cessation of all functions in the entire brain, including the brain stem, there shall be an independent confirmation by another physician. (American Law Institute 1985 [2:1]/ at 10-11). Model Penal Code, copyright 1985 by the American Law Institute. Application: The ∆ was upset because the V terminated his employment. The ∆ extremely upset over his firing premeditates to kill her. The ∆ drove to a gun shop with the intent to purchase a gun and bullets. His specific intent was to purchase and obtain possession of these items solely for the purpose of killing Marjorie. The ∆ stalks Marjorie on her way home lying in wait for her to go to bed. Marcus breaks and enters unlawfully into the V place of dwelling, once inside her home he goes into her bedroom and creeps next to her. Marcus intentionally and voluntarily reached into his pockets, pulled out the gun, aimed at Marjorie’s head and pulled the trigger. As the ∆ fled the scene of the crime he was apprehended and charged. Unknown to the ∆ Marjorie was already dead as a result of a heart attack. But for the V not having a heart attack the direct causation of death would have been the shot to the head perpetrated by the ∆. In conclusion, the court finds that the ∆ is guilty of murder in the first degree, although the V in this case died as a result of a heart attack, court is confined to rule that the Victim was still alive as legally defined by the California Statute of the Uniform Determination of Death Act §7180 (a) and §7181 that a death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards. And that when pronouncing an individual dead, there shall be an independent confirmation by a physician. Sometime’s after the defendant’s act, there is an intervening act or event before the death occurs which contributes to the death. The ∆ would not be held liable where the V as a result of some subsequent act, unconnected with the ∆ acts, which would have caused the death on its own even if the ∆ had not, inflicted the original injury on the V in this case court finds that in the alternative of death induced by means of a heart attack the V death is caused by a combination of two causes, and the ∆ act remains “an operating and a substantial cause” of the victim’s death citing, R V Smith [1959] 2 QB 35
Posted on: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 05:05:51 +0000