People v Beardsley.Case Brief PDF

Preview

Summary

Case Brief Criminal Law I - keyed to Kardish casebook 8th ed...

Description

People v Beardsley (legal duty to act vs. moral obligation) Supreme court of Michigan, 1907 150 Mic. 206, 113 N.W. 1128 Facts: - Parties: o Beardsley, respondent: convicted of manslaughter of his mistress, Blanche Burns. o State, prosecution - Procedural History: o The respondent was convicted of manslaughter and has appealed it to the Michigan Supreme Court to overturn the conviction. - Basis for Dispute: o The state believes that since the respondent was negligent in attempting to help the victim as she tried to commit suicide, he should be convicted of manslaughter, the defendant believes he has no legal obligation to do so. Issue: - Does the defendant have a legal obligation to protecting someone in his house who is attempting to commit suicide? Summary of Arguments: - The prosecution believes that since Ms. Burns was in the house of Mr. Beardsley it is laid upon him to take care of her or attempt to get her help if she tries to commit suicide by overdose; not put her in a basement room like he did where she wound up dying. - The defendant claims that he has no legal duty to do so; he was not bound to her in anyway except that they were romantically involved. Holding: - The court found that the conviction should be overturned and the respondent is set free. Court’s Reasoning: - The court believes that if you have no legal duty to care for a person (unless its something like father to son; husband to wife), you cannot be convicted for manslaughter. That is to say, a moral obligation alone is not enough for a conviction....