attendant circumstance

In law, attendant circumstances (sometimes external circumstances) are the facts surrounding an event. In criminal law in the United States, the definition of a given offense generally includes up to three kinds of "elements": the , or guilty conduct; the , or guilty mental state; and the attendant (sometimes "external") circumstances. The reason is given in Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514, 533 (1968): ...criminal penalties may be inflicted only if the accused has committed some act, has engaged in some behavior, which society has an interest in preventing. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove each "element of the offense" in order for a defendant to be found guilty. The Model Penal Code §1.13(9) offers the following definition of the phrase "elements of an offense": (i) such conduct or (ii) such attendant circumstances or (iii) such a result of conduct as (a) is included in the description of the forbidden conduct in the definition of the offense; or (b) establishes the required kind of culpability; or (c) negatives an excuse or justification for such conduct; or (d) negatives a defense under the statute of limitations; or (e) establishes jurisdiction or venue; Discussion MPC §1.13(9)(a)/(c) In United States v. Apfelbaum, 445 U.S. 115, 131 (1980), Justice Rehnquist states, in his opinion for the Court, the general rule that: In the criminal law, both a culpable mens rea and a criminal actus reus are generally required for an offense to occur. For these purposes, the term "actus reus" does not have a single definition, but it represents the general principle that before an individual may be convicted of an offense, it must be shown that there was an overt act in pursuance of any intention. Otherwise, a person might be held liable for his or her thoughts alone. Model Penal Code §2.01(1): A person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act of which he is physically capable. But there are exceptions. For example, according to United States v. Dozal, 173 F.3d 787, 797 (10th Cir. 1999) a conspiracy in violation of 21 U.S.C. §846 consists of four elements: an agreement with another person to violate the law, knowledge of the essential objectives of the conspiracy, knowing and voluntary involvement, and interdependence among the alleged conspirators. But, according to United States v. Johnson, 42 F.3d 1312, 1319 (10th Cir. 1994) (citing United States v.