Under MPC, Extreme Mental or Emotional Disturbance mitigates murder 
to voluntary manslaughter.

1. It has it's roots in Common Law's Heat of Passion.

2. It is called Extreme Mental or Emotional Disturbance under MPC.

3. It is not as limiting as Common Law.

Common Law Heat of Passion elements:
a. Actual Provocation
b. Reasonable Provocation
c. No cooling off period


Common Law versus...

___________________________________________________________
ACTUAL MPC wording of EMED: 
Section 210.3 subsection (1)(b)- 

"Criminal homicide constitutes manslaughter when:
...a homicide which would otherwise be murder is committed under the 
influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there 
is a reasonable explanation or excuse. 

The reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined 
from the viewpoint of a person in the actor's situation under the 
circumstances as he believes them to be." 
__________________________________________________________

***MPC EMED elements:
a. requires that the Defendant experience "intense feelings" 
sufficient to cause the loss of control at the time of the killing 
(SUBJECTIVE)

b. requires that the actor's emotional distress be based on 
a "reasonable explanation or excuse" 
(OBJECTIVE but determined from the Defendant's situation under 
circumstances as the Defendant believes them to be) 


*** Defendant has the burden to produce evidence of EMED but the 
state has the burden of disproving the defense Beyond a Reasonable 
Doubt.


**************MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CL and MPC:

1. MPC-- Specific Provocation by the VICTIM is NOT REQ'D. 
The actor's EMED did not need to arise from some injury or affront 
or provocative act done by the VICTIM. As long as the actor believes 
that the deceased is responsible for some injustice to another or 
even where he strikes out in a blinding rage and kills an innocent 
bystander.

2. MPC-- DOES NOT enumerate which circumstances can lead to EMED.
Common Law states when someone can be under the Heat of Passion, for 
example, spousal adultery. Under MPC, it is up to the jury to look 
at the facts and determine themselves.

3. MPC-- WORDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO PROVOKE

4. MPC-- COOLING OFF IS OKAY, NO NEED for killing to have been 
spontaneous 

5. MPC-- Look at the Reasonableness "FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF A PERSON 
IN THE ACTOR'S SITUATION" (from the standard of a reasonable person 
faced with the situation that the ACTOR faced)

*** EMED is less rigid than Heat of Passion. Think of it this way, 
if you killed someone out of rage you would want to be tried under 
MPC jurisdiction because it's EASIER to get voluntary manslaughter. 
As a defendant, you would pray the jurisdiction you were in followed 
MPC and NOT Common Law.

***Minority of jurisdictions follow EMED, for example, NEW YORK.

*** California follows the majority of jurisdictions, and uses 
Heat of Passion. 


I heard through the grapevine that Chang did some MAJOR hinting about 
EMED... so make sure you know this!!!

Good luck, 
Anna