Main Content
Model Penal Code
Commonwealth v. Camacho, 2019 MP 2 (N. Mariana Islands 2019), provides a basic account of the motivation for the Model Penal Code and reform of common law mens rea terms:
Prior to the MPC's implementation of mental states, "[t]he common law traditionally used a variety of overlapping and, frankly, confusing phrases to describe culpable mental states—among them, specific intent, general intent, presumed intent, willfulness, and malice." Voisine v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2272, 2281 (2016). "In 1970, the National Commission on Reform of Federal Criminal Laws decried the 'confused and inconsistent ad hoc approach' of the federal courts" to mens rea.… The movement to redefine mens rea resulted in a "codification of workable principles for determining criminal culpability," as well as "a general rethinking of traditional mens rea analysis." This new approach moved "away from the traditional dichotomy of intent and toward an alternative analysis of mens rea," as exemplified in the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code. As a result, "[t]he MPC does not explicitly distinguish between general and specific intent, but instead classifies crimes based on whether the act is done . . . purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently." [Citation omitted.]
This book, and all H2O books, are Creative Commons licensed for sharing and re-use with the exception of certain excerpts. Any excerpts from the Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, and the Model Penal Code are copyright by The American Law Institute. Excerpts are reproduced with permission, not as part of a Creative Commons license.