Criminal Law · Impossibility Criminal
Clear answer to: What Is The Test For Impossibility Criminal in Criminal Law? with key cases, examples, and exam tips for law students.
The test for impossibility in criminal law distinguishes between factual impossibility, which usually does not negate criminal liability, and legal impossibility, which may provide a defense under certain circumstances.
In criminal law, the concept of impossibility is critical in determining whether a defendant can evade liability for a crime they attempted but could not complete. There are two primary categories of impossibility: factual impossibility and legal impossibility. Factual impossibility occurs when the crime, due to some physical circumstance, cannot be committed; for instance, trying to pickpocket an empty pocket. However, courts typically do not accept factual impossibility as a defense, as it does not negate the intent or the steps taken towards committing the crime.
Legal impossibility, on the other hand, involves a situation where the defendant's actions, although aimed at committing a crime, do not constitute a violation of law. For example, if a person attempts to purchase what they believe is illegal drugs but the substance is actually legal, they may have a valid defense based on legal impossibility. Courts have supported this distinction, leading to complications in how different jurisdictions treat such defenses.
Key cases that illustrate these principles include: - *People v. Dlugash* (1977) - This case addresses the concept of factual impossibility where the defendant shot an individual he believed was alive, but who was already dead. The court maintained that intent was present despite the factual impossibility. - *State v. Cotton* (1994) - Highlighted the application of legal impossibility, where the defendant's belief about the legality of his actions determined the outcome of the case. - *U.S. v. Baugh* (1998) - Explored how an attempt to commit a non-existent crime, such as hurting someone with a toy gun under the belief it was real, presents a situation of legal impossibility.
The tests for these forms of impossibility can significantly affect outcomes, making it crucial for law students to understand how to distinguish between factual and legal impossibility, and the accompanying implications for criminal liability.
A defendant attempts to set fire to a house believing it to be unoccupied, but it turns out to be an empty lot. The attempt to commit arson would be considered a case of factual impossibility, and the defendant could be held liable.
Understanding the distinction between factual and legal impossibility can help students analyze problems in exam scenarios where defendants claim they cannot be guilty due to their inability to commit the crime as intended.