Manslaughter Vs Involuntary Manslaughter
Manslaughter Vs Involuntary Manslaughter
Hannah Sommer
Brett Terpstra
Abstract
The Criminal Law textbook states, Manslaughter, like murder, is an ancient common
law crime created by judges, not by legislators (Samaha, 330). Manslaughter is the killing
another person whether or not it's involuntary or involuntary. Manslaughter originally was just
one crime overall but later on manslaughter was created to be involuntary or involuntary.
Another quote used by the textbook describing this awful act, Manslaughter is...the unlawful
killing of another, which may be either voluntarily upon a sudden heat, or involuntarily...where
one had not intent to do another any personal mischief (Samaha, 331). These two type of
manslaughters have common elements, and elements that define them individually. Their are
different cases and different types. The laws for manslaughter are put in place, defined and
For centuries, we have been creating laws and readjusting them. Manslaughter is one of
these ancient law crimes. When manslaughter first became a crime, it was an ancient common
law crime that was created by judges, and not by legislators. Now that time has passed by,
manslaughter has become two crimes and not just one. Manslaughter has been broken into
unlawful killing of another, which may be either voluntarily upon a sudden heat, or
involuntarily...where one had no intent to do another any personal mischief (Samaha, 331).
Both of these crimes consist of different types of involuntary and voluntary manslaughter. They
both consist of the elements Actus Reus, Mens Rea, Circumstances, and the result. They both
also have many examples and cases that pertain to both involuntary and voluntary manslaughter.
Blackstone quotes, Manslaughter arises from the sudden heat of the passions, murder from the
wickedness of the heart (Samaha, 330). Manslaughter, like murder, is killing another person.
Voluntary manslaughter is all about the being in the moment. Voluntary manslaughter
happens when a person gets so angry in the moment that the worst is brought out in them by
killing a person. Blackstone states, If upon a sudden quarrel two persons fight, and one of them
kills the other, this is [voluntary] manslaughter. And, so it is, if they upon such an occasion go
out and fight in a field, for this is one continued act of passion and the law pays that regard to
human frailty, as not to put a hasty and deliberate act upon the same footing with regard to guilt.
So also a man be greatly provoked, as by pulling his nose, or other great indignity, and
immediately kills the aggressor, though this is not excusable, since there is no absolute necessity
for doing so to preserve himself, yet neither is it murder for there is no previous malice
Sommer | 3
(Samaha, 331). As with any other crime, proof is required for voluntary manslaughter. Their
needs to be proof of the actus reus, mens rea, causation, and death. The last element required is
There are five elements regarding voluntary manslaughter that needs to be proven. The
first is the actus reus which is seeing if the act of killing another person is indeed voluntary. The
second element is mens rea which consists of proofing either of two things. The first being the
intent to kill and the second to inflict serious bodily harm. The third element is the circumstance
which requires three things to happen as listed in Criminal Law, killing in sudden heat of
passion, adequate provocation or honest (but not reasonable) belief that the killing was in
self-defense (Samaha, 331). The fourth element is adequate provocation in which is part of the
circumstance. The fifth and final element is death. You need to check if their was factual and
murder. Adequate provocation is the actuate that starts the killing. Adequate provocation as
defined by the textbook Criminal Law is the requirement that the provocation for killing in
anger has to be something the law recognized, the defendant himself had to be provoked, and
that a reasonable person would have been provoked (Samaha, 332). Adequate provocation is
basically when a person puts all reasoning in their mind to their side and instead act on their
emotion. Adequate provocation itself has three elements which are as follows: (1) It has to be a
provocation that the law recognizes. (2) The defendant himself has to be provoked (subjective
provocation). (3) The provocation has to be one that would provoke a reasonable person under
the circumstances in this case (objective provocation (Samaha, 332). Four type of adequate
Sommer | 4
provocation [mutual combat (fighting), assault and battery, trespass, and adultery] are recognized
by many laws today and by common law. There are times when provocation is excluded when
their is a cooling off period. If a person has enough time to cool off so that his outrage to kill
someone dies off and still kills them then the adequate provocation is eliminated and this is
considered murder instead of manslaughter. This is known as objective test of cooling off time.
A great example of this objective test of cooling off time is the familiar case, Case v. Flory. This
case involves three main people; E.T. Ostrum, his daughter Daisy Flory and her husband Charles
Flory. Flory would farm in the summer and in the winter he was a trapper. Flory left to go
trapping and while he was trapping Ostrum stayed at the Florys fam in Montana. Once Charles
returned from trapping, Ostrum also returned to his farm fifty miles away in Wyoming.
Eventually, Daisy got the courage to tell Charles that she was raped by her father while he was
away trapping. Charles had a sudden heat of passion, grabbed a gun he had, walked all day,
stayed over night at Mr Hudsonpillars house, and the next morning walked to his father in laws
house. The two men got in a heated argument, and Charles being so angered under the
circumstances shot Ostrum. The jury originally convicted Charles of second-degree murder but
got appealed ruling that Charles did not have enough time to reasonably cool down and so his
crime was then reduced to voluntary manslaughter rather than murder. This case shows just how
the cooling off period for a person and a crime can change. This case also shows the element of
adequate provocation from the sudden heat of passion that Charles had after finding out his wife
killing a person. Blackstone states, The second brand, or involuntary manslaughter...is where a
person does an act lawful in itself, but in an unlawful manner and without due caution and
circumspection: as when a workman flings down a stone or piece of timber into the street and
kills a man (Samaha, 341). Involuntary manslaughter has two main elements like voluntary
manslaughter has its main element of adequate provocation. The main elements for involuntary
manslaughter is the actus reus and the mens rea. It also includes two other elements circumstance
The actus reus of involuntary manslaughter is if the act of killing a person was voluntary.
The mens rea of involuntary includes two things like the mens rea of voluntary manslaughter but
instead of focusing on the intent, it instead focuses on (1) the extreme recklessness and (2) the
extreme negligence. The element circumstance includes three items which are as follows: (1)
conscious creation of substantial and unjustifiable risk of death or serious bodily injury or (2)
unconscious creation of substantial and unjustifiable risk of death of death or serious bodily
injury or (3) death occurs during the commission of a qualifying unlawful act (Samaha, 342).
The final element is the same element for voluntary manslaughter; the causation and bad result.
The element, for involuntary manslaughter, causation requires factual and legal cause and then
There are two main types of involuntary manslaughter which all depends on the case and
the state. The first being criminal negligence manslaughter and the second being unlawful act
manslaughter. Criminal negligence manslaughter is a person who kills someone and acts with
such a significant and inexcusable risk but ignores the possibility of someone being seriously
harmed or killed. and acts to kills. Criminal negligence manslaughter includes two elements
Sommer | 6
which is stated in Criminal Law. The first element is actus reus, the defendants acts create a
high (substantial and unjustifiable) risk of death or serious bodily injury (Samaha, 343). The
second element is mens rea, the defendant is aware that the risk of death or serious bodily injury
is high but commits the acts anyway (Samaha, 343). An example of recklessness and negligence
is similar to getting a ticket. A person who drives at fifteen above the speed limit is driving
recklessly because they know that they are creating a high risk of harm by driving that fast. A
person who drives at fifteen above the speed limit is driving negligently because they should
know that they are creating a high risk of harm but dont actually know its a risk. This example
is the same for criminal negligence manslaughter. A person is reckless when they know that their
could be harm or death caused to a person but still acts to cause harm or death. A person is
negligent when they should know that their could be harm or death caused to a person but does
not know and still acts to cause harm or death. An example of criminal negligence manslaughter
is the case of State v. Mays. This case is described as, 19-year-old Nicholas Mays killed
Michael Boumer, in a grocery store parking, when Mays messes with him by nudging
Boumer with his car (Samaha, 343). In this case, Mays thought Boumer was under the influence
but did not know Boumer was actually handicapped. Mays wanted to offer a ride and wanted to
nudge him to do so but instead of nudging Boumer with the car, he ended up killing him. Mays
made the decision to drive the car and nudge Boumer which was reckless and was negligent
while doing so. Nicholas Mays was, therefore, driving the car recklessly and negligently which
The other type of manslaughter is unlawful act manslaughter. This manslaughter are
unintended deaths that results in acts that is not authorized by the law (aka unlawful acts).
Sommer | 7
Criminal Law states, In modern times, statues have restricted unlawful act manslaughter
because the penalty is considered to harsh. In fact, theres a trend to abolish unlawful act
manslaughter. This manslaughter is often also called misdemeanor manslaughter because the
unintended deaths can also result from misdemeanors. Unlawful acts and misdemeanors include
everything from simple traffic violations to administrative crimes. The most popular of
misdemeanors include drunk driving, speeding and driving, assault and battery. Criminal Law
provides an example of this in the case People v. Datema, Greg and Pamela Datema were
sitting around in their living room with friends talking, smoking pot, and drinking. The
conversation turned to their previous romances. Pam and Greg started arguing about the people
theyd slept with. Pam claimed shed had sex with some of her paramours in front of their sons.
Greg slapped her in the face-once. Pam slumped back; the other three thought shed passed out.
After 10 minutes, they got worried. When they shook her and she didnt wake up, they called for
an ambulance. Pam never regained consciousness. The medical examiner found that Pam
Datema had a blood-alcohol level between. 0.03 and 0.05 percent. He stated that death was by a
tear in an artery in the head that occurred as the result of Gregs slap (Samaha, 346). Slapping
his wife, Pam, while they were doing an unlawful act is an example of unlawful act
only exists in half the states in the United States since they are working to try to abolish this form
of manslaughter. Unlawful act manslaughter includes a malum prohibitum crimes which means
manslaughter have different elements itself as well. The purpose of having two different types of
involuntary. Manslaughter is a crime that has existed since common law and has a good reason
for it to exist. These laws are put in place to make the United States of America a safer place.
Blackstone states, Crime...is not simply anything which a legislature chooses to call a crime. It
is not simply antisocial conduct which public officers are given a responsibility to suppress. It is
not simply any conduct which the legislature chooses to attach a criminal penalty. It is conduct
which...will incur a formal and solemn pronouncement of the moral condemnation of the
community (Samaha, 10). Laws are not just put in place to be there. Laws are not just for fun or
to make life harder. Laws, like manslaughter, are put into place for our community.
Sommer | 9
Works Cited
Blackstone, Sir William. Commentaries on the Laws of England, IV. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1769.
Casetext, casetext.com/case/state-v-flory-7.
Samaha, Joel. Chapter 9 Manslaughter. Criminal Law, 11th ed., Wadsworth, 2014.
Unlawful Act - Legal Definition. Unlawful Act Dictionary Definition | Unlawful Act
Defined, www.yourdictionary.com/unlawful-act.