|
13-201. Requirements for criminal liability
The minimum requirement for criminal liability is the performance by a person of conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform a duty imposed by law which the person
is physically capable of performing.
13-202. Construction of statutes with respect to culpability
- If a statute defining an offense prescribes a culpable mental state that is sufficient for commission of the offense without distinguishing among the elements of such offense, the
prescribed mental state shall apply to each such element unless a contrary legislative purpose plainly appears.
- If a statute defining an offense does not expressly prescribe a culpable mental state that is sufficient for commission of the offense, no culpable mental state is required for the
commission of such offense, and the offense is one of strict liability unless the proscribed conduct necessarily involves a culpable mental state. If the offense is one of strict liability,
proof of a culpable mental state will also suffice to establish criminal responsibility.
- If a statute provides that criminal negligence suffices to establish an element of an offense, that element also is established if a person acts intentionally, knowingly or
recklessly. If acting recklessly suffices to establish an element, that element also is established if a person acts intentionally or knowingly. If acting knowingly suffices to
establish an element, that element is also established if a person acts intentionally.
13-203. Causal relationship between conduct and result; relationship to mental culpability
- Conduct is the cause of a result when both of the following exist:
- But for the conduct the result in question would not have occurred.
- The relationship between the conduct and result satisfies any additional causal requirements imposed by the statute defining the offense.
- If intentionally causing a particular result is an element of an offense, and the actual result is not within the intention or contemplation of the person, that element is established if:
- The actual result differs from that intended or contemplated only in the respect that a different person or different property is injured or affected or that the injury or harm intended or
contemplated would have been more serious or extensive than that caused; or
- The actual result involves similar injury or harm as that intended or contemplated and occurs in a manner which the person knows or should know is rendered substantially more probable by
such person's conduct.
- If recklessly or negligently causing a particular result is an element of an offense, and the actual result is not within the risk of which the person is aware or in the case of criminal
negligence, of which the person should be aware, that element is established if:
- The actual result differs from the probable result only in the respect that a different person or different property is injured or affected or that the injury or harm intended or
contemplated would have been more serious or extensive than that caused; or
- The actual result involves similar injury or harm as the probable result and occurs in a manner which the person knows or should know is rendered substantially more probable by such
person's conduct.
13-204. Effect of ignorance or mistake upon criminal liability
- Ignorance or a mistaken belief as to a matter of fact does not relieve a person of criminal liability unless:
- It negates the culpable mental state required for commission of the offense; or
- It supports a defense of justification as defined in chapter 4 of this title.
- Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of law does not relieve a person of criminal responsibility.
13-205. Affirmative defenses; justification; burden of proof
- Except as otherwise provided by law, a defendant shall prove any affirmative defense raised by a preponderance of the evidence. Justification defenses under chapter 4 of this title are not
affirmative defenses. Justification defenses describe conduct that, if not justified, would constitute an offense but, if justified, does not constitute criminal or wrongful conduct. If evidence
of justification pursuant to chapter 4 of this title is presented by the defendant, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act with justification.
- This section does not affect the presumption contained in section 13-411, subsection C and section 13-503.
Disclaimer: These are the statutes as they read on October 30, 2008 on the Arizona State Legislature's website. Each year the Arizona State Legislature changes some of the criminal
laws. Generally (but not always), the criminal law (statute) that is in place on the date of offense is the law that applies to the case. To find the most current version of the statute go to the
Arizona State Legislature's website (http://www.azleg.gov/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp?Title=13)
Top of Page
|
