Criminal Law · Impossibility Criminal

What Is Impossibility Criminal in Criminal Law?

Clear answer to: What Is Impossibility Criminal in Criminal Law? with key cases, examples, and exam tips for law students.

Short Answer

Impossibility in criminal law refers to a defendant's inability to commit a crime due to circumstances beyond their control. There are two types: factual impossibility and legal impossibility, each affecting criminal liability differently.

Detailed Answer

Impossibility in criminal law is a doctrine that examines a defendant’s criminal intent when they attempt to commit a crime but are unable to complete the act due to external circumstances. It is primarily categorized into two types: factual impossibility and legal impossibility. Factual impossibility occurs when the crime cannot be completed because a necessary factual element is absent; for instance, attempting to pickpocket an empty pocket. In contrast, legal impossibility arises when the act, if completed, would not constitute a crime under the law, such as attempting to sell a weapon that is not illegal to sell.

The significance of these distinctions lies in how they affect a defendant's criminal liability. Generally, a defendant cannot be held liable for an attempt if it is factually impossible to commit the crime, though jurisdictions may differ on whether this absolves liability. However, legal impossibility may still result in liability for an attempted crime in jurisdictions that recognize such attempts, since the intent to commit a crime is still evident despite the legal barrier.

Key cases that illustrate these principles include *People v. Dlugash* (1977), where the court held that a defendant could be guilty of an attempted murder even if the intended victim was already dead, highlighting the nuances of factual versus legal impossibility. In *State v. McDade* (1984), the court ruled that there was no attempt where the defendant attempted to steal an item they had a legal right to possess, indicating the relevance of legal impossibility.

Additionally, *People v. Lentz* (1939) differentiated between situations that might qualify as legal impossibility versus factual impossibility, illustrating how different jurisdictions apply these concepts differently. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for law students as they navigate the complexities of criminal intent and liability.

Key Cases
  • 1People v. Dlugash (1977) - established the concept of attempting a crime that is factually impossible.
  • 2State v. McDade (1984) - emphasized the distinction between legal and factual impossibility in affirming lack of liability.
  • 3People v. Lentz (1939) - clarified the definitions of legal and factual impossibility in criminal attempts.
Practical Example

A person intends to kill another and shoots at them, but misses entirely and hits a mannequin. This situation raises factual impossibility as the crime of murder cannot be completed because the supposed victim is not harmed, although the intent was present.

Exam Relevance

Questions on impossibility often appear in criminal law exams, testing students' understanding of the nuances of attempted crimes and the implications of intent versus action.

Get Answers to All Your Legal Questions

Get AI-powered case briefs, legal Q&A, and comprehensive study tools for law school.