Loading The VR School
Loading The VR School
This week examines criminal homicide — the unlawful killing of a human being. Homicide is the most heavily tested criminal law topic on both the Baby Bar and the California Bar. The analysis requires distinguishing first-degree murder (premeditated/deliberate, felony murder), second-degree murder (intent to inflict serious bodily injury, depraved heart, felony murder for non-enumerated felonies), voluntary manslaughter (heat of passion, imperfect self-defense), and involuntary manslaughter (criminal negligence, misdemeanor-manslaughter). Every homicide question requires systematic progression through the hierarchy from highest to lowest culpability.
Every homicide question requires you to work through the hierarchy from top to bottom, stopping at the highest level the facts support:
``` FIRST-DEGREE MURDER (highest culpability) ↓ SECOND-DEGREE MURDER ↓ VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER (intentional but mitigated) ↓ INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER (unintentional) ↓ NO CRIMINAL LIABILITY (justifiable/excusable) ```
At common law, murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Despite the name, malice does NOT require ill will or premeditation — it is a legal term of art with four categories:
| Type of Malice | Mental State | |---------------|-------------| | Express malice | Intent to kill | | Intent to inflict serious bodily injury | Purposely inflicting great bodily harm (death results) | | Depraved heart | Extreme recklessness — conscious disregard of substantial risk of death | | Felony murder | Killing during inherently dangerous felony (intent to commit felony supplies the malice) |
Elements: 1. Premeditation — The defendant thought about killing beforehand (reflection) 2. Deliberation — The defendant made a conscious decision to kill (cool mind) 3. Intent to kill — The defendant's purpose was to cause death
Key Point: Premeditation does NOT require extensive planning. Courts have held that premeditation can form in an instant — "no time is too short for a wicked person to frame in his mind the scheme of murder." But there must be SOME evidence of reflection beyond the mere act of killing.
Evidence of Premeditation (Anderson factors — California): 1. Planning activity (acquiring a weapon, lying in wait, luring the victim) 2. Motive (prior relationship, threats, financial gain) 3. Manner of killing (execution-style, deliberate method)
A killing — even accidental — during the commission of an enumerated inherently dangerous felony is first-degree murder.
BARRK Felonies: - Burglary - Arson - Robbery - Rape (and other forcible sex crimes) - Kidnapping
The defendant need not intend to kill — the intent to commit the underlying felony supplies the malice.
All murders that are NOT first-degree:
Classic examples: - Firing a gun into a crowded room - Playing Russian roulette with another person - Driving 100+ mph through a school zone - Throwing heavy objects off a highway overpass
Distinguished from involuntary manslaughter: Both involve unintentional killing + recklessness. The difference is degree: - Depraved heart (murder) = EXTREME recklessness, wanton disregard - Criminal negligence (manslaughter) = GROSS negligence, substantial deviation
An intentional killing that would be murder but is mitigated by circumstances that reduce moral culpability.
All four elements must be satisfied:
| Element | Requirement | |---------|------------| | 1. Adequate provocation | Would arouse sudden intense passion in a reasonable person | | 2. Actual passion | Defendant was actually in the heat of passion | | 3. Insufficient cooling time | Not enough time for a reasonable person to cool down | | 4. Actual failure to cool | Defendant did not in fact cool down before killing |
What constitutes adequate provocation: - Physical assault or battery (always adequate) - Witnessing spouse in act of adultery (traditional — being told is NOT sufficient) - Mutual combat - Illegal arrest with excessive force
What does NOT constitute adequate provocation: - Words alone (majority rule — mere insults, however offensive, are insufficient) - Learning about a past wrong (not witnessing it) - Minor battery (tap on the shoulder) - Provocation directed at a third party (split of authority)
A killing that would be justified self-defense except: - The defendant's belief in the need for deadly force was genuine but unreasonable, OR - The defendant was the initial aggressor and did not properly withdraw
Reduces murder to voluntary manslaughter because the defendant had SOME justification, but not enough for a complete defense.
An unintentional killing without malice:
Merger Doctrine: If the underlying felony is an assault or battery (conduct that results in the killing itself), the felony MERGES with the homicide and cannot serve as the predicate for felony murder. Otherwise, every killing with intent would automatically be felony murder (through felonious assault), collapsing the distinction between murder and manslaughter.
Res Gestae: The death must occur DURING the felony or the immediate flight from it. Once the felon reaches a place of temporary safety, the felony murder window closes.
Who Can Be Charged: - Agency theory (majority): Only deaths caused by a co-felon (or agent of the felon) trigger felony murder. If a police officer or victim kills someone during the felony, felony murder does NOT apply. - Proximate cause theory (minority): Any death that is a foreseeable consequence of the felony triggers the rule — including deaths caused by police, victims, or bystanders.
``` Was there an unlawful killing? ↓ YES Was there MALICE AFORETHOUGHT? → YES: MURDER Was there premeditation + deliberation? → YES: FIRST-DEGREE MURDER Was it during a BARRK felony? → YES: FIRST-DEGREE FELONY MURDER Otherwise: SECOND-DEGREE MURDER → NO: Was the killing INTENTIONAL? → YES: Was there adequate provocation / heat of passion? → YES: VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER → NO: Was there criminal negligence or an unlawful act? → YES: INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER → NO: No criminal homicide (accident) ```
Criminal homicide is the most heavily tested topic on the Baby Bar criminal law essay. The examiners expect you to: 1. Work through the hierarchy systematically (not jump to the answer) 2. Analyze murder FIRST, then consider whether mitigation reduces it to manslaughter 3. Discuss ALL potentially applicable theories (don't stop at the first one that works) 4. Address felony murder whenever a felony is present in the fact pattern 5. Analyze heat of passion even if the facts don't perfectly fit — show you considered it
Critical exam strategy: NEVER write "this is voluntary manslaughter" without FIRST explaining why it meets the elements of murder and THEN explaining the mitigating circumstance that reduces it.
The statutes SofAI ties to this topic. Use them as your IRAC rule block, then verify the current text on the official leginfo link.
An attempt requires the specific intent to commit the crime plus a direct but ineffectual act toward committing it.
Conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime, together with an overt act toward it.
Homicide is the SINGLE MOST TESTED topic on the Baby Bar criminal law essay. You must be able to work through the hierarchy systematically: establish murder first, then analyze whether mitigation applies. Felony murder, heat of passion, and the depraved heart / criminal negligence distinction appear on nearly every exam. Master the flowchart — it is your roadmap for every homicide question.