Legal Writing: Analysis of Involuntary Manslaughter Case in US Law

This legal writing assignment analyzes a case of involuntary manslaughter, focusing on the criminal liability of Prem for the death of Vijay. The assignment identifies the issue, which revolves around determining Prem's responsibility. It then discusses relevant rules, including the definition of involuntary manslaughter under 18 U.S. Code § 1112, distinguishing it from voluntary manslaughter and highlighting the role of recklessness and negligence. The analysis references key legal precedents such as United States v. Gomez-Leon, United States v. Dominguez-Ochoa, and State v. Butler to illustrate the legal principles. Applying these rules to the case, the assignment argues that Prem's negligent act of firing a rifle without proper care directly caused Vijay's death, constituting involuntary manslaughter. The assignment concludes that Prem should be held criminally liable, potentially facing imprisonment or fines under the 18 U.S. Code. The document is well-structured, providing a clear issue, relevant legal rules, application to the facts, and a conclusion, supported by legal citations.

Running head: LEGAL WRITING
Legal Writing
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1LEGAL WRITING
Issue
The issue in this present scenario is to determine the criminal liability of Prem for the
death of Vijay.
Relevant Rules
The present issue can be determined by discussing the relevant law relating to
involuntary manslaughter in the United States. Manslaughter refers to the unlawful act of
causing death to a person, which can be categorised as voluntary and involuntary. 18 U.S.
Code § 1112 provides that involuntary manslaughter is the act of killing a person in the
absence of any actual intention to kill that person. The death of the person may have been
occurred as the result of the reckless or negligent act of the defendant. An act of involuntary
manslaughter involves criminal liability for the accused though it is a less serious crime
(Seibold 2017). This act can be identified as the justifiable homicide. As per the decision of
United States v Gomez-Leon, 545F.3d 777, 791 (9th Cir 2008) criminal negligent
manslaughter happens when there is an omission to perform a duty which is owed by the
defendant to the victim that resulted into the death of a person. In United States v
Dominguez-Ochoa, 386 F.3d 639, 645-46 (5th Cir. 2004) the recklessness or negligence
involves a high grade of risk of serious injury or death.
Involuntary manslaughter by negligence or recklessness involves a high risk of
substantial personal injury of another, resulting from the negligent act of the accused. The
fact that the accused did not foresee the death of another person as an outcome of his
unlawful conduct, would not safeguard him from his liabilities. A person would be made
liable for his act if it is proved that he was negligent by ordinary standards and the negligence
caused the death of the victim. In State v Butler 297 U.S. 1 (1936), the Supreme Court
decided that the responsibility for involuntary manslaughter could be imposed on the

2LEGAL WRITING
defendant, irrespective of his intention. The Court further held that unless the act resulted into
the violation of a law, the accused cannot be charged with involuntary manslaughter. The
United States Code under Section 1112, a person can be liable for imprisonment for a term of
years or for life. As the involuntary manslaughter does not involve the intention, the
defendant cannot take the defence that it was not her intention to commit the crime.
Application
In this case, it was the responsibility of Prem to take reasonable care before firing his
rifle in the bush. It can be considered an unlawful act that Prem fired his rifle without
exercising proper care that a reasonable man in his position would have exercised. As the
factor of intention does not play in this case, Prem cannot take the defence that he did not
caused the death of Vijay, intentionally. Because of the negligent act of Prem while hunting,
Vijay died. If Prem had taken a little care before firing his rifle in the bush and examined the
reason behind the movement in the bush, he would not have caused death to Vijay. The death
of Vijay was directly resulted from the negligent act of Prem. As per 18 U.S. Code § 1112,
Prem would be liable for his act irrespective of the intention of Prem to harm Vijay. The act
of Prem can be defined as an involuntary manslaughter as he killed Vijay even if he was not
intending to do that. The degree of this negligence was so extreme that he should have known
that his act might result into death of a person. A reasonable man in his position would have
foreseen the high degree of risk that can be caused from his act. It can be proved that Prem
was negligent from his ordinary standard and failed to exercise his duty to take care. As a
consequence, Vijay died. Prem is guilty of involuntary manslaughter for which he might be
fined under the 18 United States Code or be liable for imprisonment for not more than 8 years
or both.

3LEGAL WRITING
Conclusion
Prem should be criminally liable for the death caused to Vijay from his act.

4LEGAL WRITING
References:
18 U.S. Code
State v Butler 297 U.S. 1 (1936)
United States v Dominguez-Ochoa, 386 F.3d 639, 645-46 (5th Cir. 2004)
United States v Gomez-Leon, 545F.3d 777, 791 (9th Cir 2008)
Seibold, J.H., 2017. The Felony-Murder Rule: In Search of a Viable Doctrine. The Catholic
Lawyer, 23(2), p.8.