Posted: May 18th, 2017

Pinckney broke into his neighbor’s garage to steal some gasoline by siphoning it out of the car. When Pinckney lit a match to check the level of the gasoline, the fumes ignited and caused an explosion. The ensuing fire consumed the garage. Pinckney has been convicted under a statute that prescribes punishment for anyone who “intentionally or knowingly sets fire to a building.” If there is an appeal, the conviction should be:

Pinckney broke into his neighbor’s garage to steal some gasoline by siphoning it out of the car. When Pinckney lit a match to check the level of the gasoline, the fumes ignited and caused an explosion. The ensuing fire consumed the garage. Pinckney has been convicted under a statute that prescribes punishment for anyone who “intentionally or knowingly sets fire to a building.” If there is an appeal, the conviction should be: a. Affirmed because Pinckney’s wrongful intention to steal would be “transferred” to the act of setting the fire. b. Affirmed because Pinckney acted with criminal intent and a guilty mind, thus satisfying the requirement of mens rea. c. Reversed because Pinckney did not act with the mens rea specified in the statute. d. Reversed because conviction under this statute would require that Pinckney’s reckless conduct caused the fire