Warning
Info
- - tl;dr
- - ICRA
- - Facts & Holding
- - DeepDive
0 0
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 532 F.2d 697
Tags: Criminal law, Knowledge, Mens rea
tl;dr:
A person can be held criminally liable for acts he did not know he was committing if his lack of knowledge was solely the result of deliberate ignorance.Video Summary
DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition
The court clarified that the mental state required for conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) includes the intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense a controlled substance. The defendant can be convicted if they consciously avoided learning the truth about the substance. The trial judge correctly instructed the jury that "knowingly" meant voluntarily and intentionally, and that deliberate avoidance of knowledge could lead to a conviction. The rule that deliberate ignorance is equivalent to positive knowledge is justified both substantively and textually. The Model Penal Code adopts this analysis, stating that knowledge of a fact is established if a person is aware of a high probability of its existence, unless they actually believe it does not exist.
The article discusses the burden of proof required by the government to prove a defendant's knowledge of possessing marijuana while entering the United States. The conscious purpose instruction given by the government contradicts the additional mens rea required for count two, which is the intent to distribute. The wilful blindness doctrine has limitations and uncertainties, and the Model Penal Code restricts the English doctrine when a statute requires knowledge as an element of a crime. The court cannot substitute some other state of mind, even if both states of mind are equally blameworthy. The jury instruction in United States v. Jewell had three defects. The instruction was erroneous because it could have allowed the jury to convict Jewell without being certain beyond a reasonable doubt that he possessed the mens rea required for knowing possession or importation under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a) & 960(a). The defense counsel objected to the instruction before it was given, but the trial judge rejected the argument and refused to add an addendum to the charge.
LSD+ Case Briefs
Features
- DeepDive for detailed case analysis
- Over 50,000 existing case briefs
- Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
- Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
- Social learning with chat and high points
Over 50,000 Cases Briefed
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
14-Day Free Trial
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Integrated Legal Dictionary
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Brief anything. Instantly.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Social Learning with Chat and High Points
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Real-Time Brief Feedback
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.