MBE Rules · Criminal Law
Strict-Liability Offenses
Strict-liability offenses
The rule
Public-welfare and morality offenses (statutory rape, regulatory crimes) dispense with mens rea as to a key element; mistake of fact is no defense to the strict element.
In plain English
Strict-liability offenses are crimes that do not require proof of intent or knowledge regarding a key element of the crime. This means that even if a defendant did not intend to commit the offense or was unaware of certain facts, they can still be held liable.
Worked example
A 17-year-old engages in sexual relations with a 15-year-old, believing she is 16. In this case, the 17-year-old can be prosecuted for statutory rape despite his belief about her age, as strict liability applies and mistake of fact is not a defense. The outcome is that he is found guilty.
Memory hook
No intent needed, just the act – strict liability sticks!
The trap
Exams often present scenarios where students might think a mistake of fact could absolve liability, but under strict liability, that defense is not available. Students may confuse strict liability with other offenses that do require mens rea.
How examiners test it
Questions typically involve fact patterns related to public welfare or morality offenses, where the focus is on the absence of mens rea and the implications of strict liability. Look for keywords like 'statutory rape' or 'regulatory crime' to identify these issues.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.