Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Ordinarily, to be criminally culpable the actor must have volitionally committed the criminal act (actus reus), and must have done so with the requisite criminal state of mind (mens rea). In other words, the criminal law ordinarily does not criminally punish acts that are uncontrollable (such as an epileptic striking someone during a seizure), or accidental (such as inadvertently hitting another car in a parking lot). Criminal law also punishes equivalent harm more seriously if the harm was committed purposely than if the harm was committed recklessly. Those concepts are grounded in fairness, that is, that criminal consequences should be commensurate with both the degree of harm and the actor's relative criminal culpability.

The Model Penal Code and Its Levels of Criminal Intent

Those fairness concepts were codified by the American Law Institute (ALI) in 1962 in the ALI's official draft of its Model Penal Code (MPC). The Model Penal Code is just that, a model. Unless enacted into law in a particular state, the MPC is merely advisory. But upon the creation of the Model Penal Code, it quickly became the gold standard, and now most states have adopted Model Penal Code concepts, principles, and provisions in whole or in substantial part. The Model Penal Code's conceptions of intent will illuminate the meaning of “knowledge” in the criminal law. The highest (most serious) level of criminal intent under the MPC is “purpose,” achieved when the actor's conscious objective or purpose in committing the act is to cause the harm.

Under the MPC, if the actor commits the criminal act with the purpose of causing the harm, that actor acted with purpose. As one example, a murderer acts purposely when he aims a gun at the victim and fires the weapon with the purpose of killing the victim. Purpose is analogous to “intent” in many state criminal codes.

The slightly less serious level of criminal intent within the MPC is “knowledge,” achieved when the actor is aware of the circumstances and is practically certain the harm will result from his criminal act. As one example, if a person puts a bomb aboard a plane with purpose of killing the pilot, he acted purposefully with respect to killing the pilot, but acted knowingly with respect to all the others on the plane, since he was practically certain they all would be killed by his criminal act. In the criminal law, the “knowledge” requirement may appear in many forms, including knowledge, knowing, knowingly, and with knowledge, among other variations.

The third level of criminal intent within the MPC is “recklessness,” achieved when the actor consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk in a way that is a gross deviation from the standard of conduct a law-abiding person would display in the same situation.

The lowest level of criminal intent within the MPC is “negligence,” commonly referred to as criminal negligence. This is similar to recklessness but is less criminal because the negligent actor should have known of the substantial and unjustifiable risk the actor disregarded, but the reckless actor consciously disregarded that risk.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading