Recently, the Court decided Rosemond v. United States. In Rosemond, the Court had to determine the requisite mental state for aiding and abetting a particular federal crime. While the Court had the opportunity to weigh in on the natural and probable consequence doctrine in Rosemond, it declined to do so in footnote 7. This Note reviews the natural and probable consequence doctrine, its reception by courts and commentators, and the Court’s holding in Rosemond. This Note then applies the holding of Rosemond to several federal cases that employed the doctrine to determine whether, despite footnote 7, the doctrine survives Rosemond. Ultimately, this Note concludes the doctrine does not survive and that such a result is desirable in light of the doctrine’s incompatibility with basic principles of AngloAmerican criminal law.
Accidental Vitiation: The Natural and Probable Consequence of Rosemond v. United States on the Natural and Probable Consequence Doctrine,
85 Fordham L. Rev. 1281
Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol85/iss3/13