Actus Reus
Resources
See Also
Related Case Law
Commonwealth v. Dusenbery, 220 Va. 770, 263 S.E. 2d 392 (1980).
Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514 (1968).
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962).
Further Reading
American Law Institute. Model Penal Code. Philadelphia: ALI, 1962.
Annas, Julia. “How Basic Are Basic Actions?” Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society 78 (1978): 195-213.
Armstrong, David. A Theory of Universals. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1978.
Austin, J. L. “A Plea for Excuses.” Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society 57 (1956): 1-30.
Austin, John. Lectures on Jurisprudence, 5th ed. London: 1885.
Bennett, Jonathan. Events and Their Names. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1988.
Bentham, Jeremy. Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789). Buffalo, N.Y.: 1988.
Brand, Myles. “The Language of Not Doing.” American Philosophical Quarterly 8 (1971): 45-53.
Bratman, Michael. Intentions, Plans, and Practical Reason. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1987.
Buxton, R. “Circumstances, Consequences, and Attempted Rape.” Criminal Law Review (1984): 25-34.
Corrado, Michael. “Is There an Act Requirement in the Criminal Law?” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 142 (1994): 1529-1561.
Davidson, Donald. Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1980.
Duff, R. A. Intention, Agency, and Criminal Liability. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Epstein, Richard. “A Theory of Strict Liability.” Journal of Legal Studies 2 (1973): 151-204.
Fletcher, George. Rethinking Criminal Law. Boston: Little, Brown, 1978.
. “On the Moral Irrelevance of Bodily Movements.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 142 (1994): 1443-1453.
Goldman, Alvin. A Theory of Human Action. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970.
. “Action and Crime: A Fine-Grained Approach.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 142 (1994): 1563-1586.
More Further Reading
Gross, Hyman. A Theory of Criminal Justice. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979.
Hart, H. L. A. “Acts of Will and Responsibility.” In Punishment and Responsibility. Edited by H. L. A. Hart, Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1968. Pages 90-112.
Holmes, Oliver Wendell. the Common Law. Boston: Little, Brown, 1881.
Hughes, Graham. “Criminal Omissions.” Yale Law Journal 67 (1958): 590-637.
Kadish, Sanford. “The Decline of Innocence.” Blame and Punishment. Edited by Sanford Kadish. New York: Macmillan, 1987.
Mack, Eric. “Bad Samaritanism and the Causation of Harm.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 9 (1980): 230-259.
Moore, Michael S. Act and Crime: The Philosophy of Action and Its Implications for Criminal Law. Oxford, U.K.: Clarendon Press, 1993.
. “More on Act and Crime.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 142 (1994): 1749-1840.
Packer, Herbert. The Limits of the Criminal Sanction. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1968.
Rescher, Nicholas. “On the Characterization of Actions.” The Nature of Human Action. Edited by M. Brand. Glenview, Ill.: Scott Foresman, 1970.
Ryle, Gilbert. The Concept of Mind. London: Hutcheson, 1949.
Scholz, Franz. Sleep and Dream. Translated by H. J. Jewett. New York: 1893.
Thalberg, Irving. Perception, Emotion, and Action. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1977.
Vermazen, Bruce. “Negative Acts.” Essays on Davidson’s Actions and Events. Edited by B. Vermazen and M. Hintikka. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1985.
Williams, Glanville. Criminal Law: The General Part. 2d ed. London: Stevens and Sons, 1961.
. “The Problem of Reckless Attempts.” Criminal Law Review (1983): 365-375.
Actus reus in Law Enforcement
Main Entry: Law Enforcement in the Legal Dictionary. This section provides, in the context of Law Enforcement, a partial definition of actus reus.
Resources
See Also
- Law Enforcement Officer
- Police Officer
- Law Enforcement Agency
Further Reading
- actus reus in A Dictionary of Law Enforcement (Oxford University Press)
- actus reus in the Encyclopedia of Law Enforcement
- A Treatise on the Police of the Metropolis
Definition of Actus Reus
In the context of international law, the legal resource A Dictionary of Law, provides a definition of Actus Reus : (Latin: a guilty act)
The essential element of a crime that must be proved to secure a conviction, as opposed to the mental state of the accused (See mens rea). In most cases the actus reus will simply be an act (e.g. appropriation of property is the act of theft) accompanied by specified circumstances (e.g. that the property belongs to another). Sometimes, however, it may be an *omission to act (e.g. failure to prevent death may be the actus reus of manslaughter) or it may include a specified consequence (death resulting within a year being the consequence required for the actus reus of murder or manslaughter). In certain cases the actus reus may simply be a state of affairs rather than an act (e.g. being unfit to drive through drink or drugs when in charge of a motor vehicle on a road).
Definition of Actus Reus
The Canada social science dictionary [1] provides the following meaning of Actus Reus: One of two components of a crime, the other being mens rea. Actus reus refers to the physical component of a crime, the act of committing the crime (eg: actually taking the stereo from someone’s house). Mens rea , in contrast, is the mental component of crime, the existence of a criminal intent, and this requires the offender to have intended to carry out the physical act. Both components are required for conviction under criminal law although for some other laws, called laws of absolute liability, only the physical component is required.
Actus Reus: Resources
Notes and References
- Drislane, R., & Parkinson, G. (2016). (Concept of) Actus Reus. Online dictionary of the social sciences. Open University of Canada
Leave a Reply