Criminal Law Emily

Proving intent can be challenging. What kind of crimes require specific intent and how difficult is that to prove? Which crimes might be easier to prove intent than others? What kinds of proof might be used for certain crimes than others?

Specific intent is required to prove certain crimes. For example, robbery, when someone commits a crime of robbery they have to show specific intent. They showed force to take something that wasn’t theirs. Burglary, larceny, embezzlement, all theft crimes require specific intent. Murder in the first degree requires specific intent to be proven. Conspiracy and solicitation also require specific intent. With specific intent crimes like robbery not only does prosecution need to prove a person took the item but that they intended to keep it. In general intent crimes like homicide for example, the fact that the crime was committed is enough to prosecute off of.  Some crimes are easier to prove intent than others. For example, if I want commit conspiracy the fact that I sought someone else out to commit that crime is evidence enough to prove intent. To take this example further, two people agree to start drug smuggling business. When they are caught, and the government is trying to prosecute them the government must prove the two people agreed to work together to commit the crime. [1] First degree murder may be more difficult. I shot someone in the leg, but I never intended for them to die. Although it varies between states since each state law varies the three factors to prove first degree murder with specific intent is willfulness, deliberation and premeditation. [2] A case example of this that happened in July of this year was Scott Peterson. Scott killed his pregnant wife Lacie and was charged with first degree murder of her death and second-degree murder of their unborn child. The jury’s deliberation lasted 44 hours after listening to over five months’ worth of testimonies from more than 174 people.

200 words no reference put in your own words