Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 13A-2-3 (2026)
Requirements for Criminal Liability in General and for Offenses of Strict Liability and of Mental Culpability.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
The minimum requirement for criminal liability is the performance by a person of conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act which he is physically capable of performing. If that conduct is all that is required for commission of a particular offense, or if an offense or some material element thereof does not require a culpable mental state on the part of the actor, the offense is one of “strict liability.” If a culpable mental state on the part of the actor is required with respect to any material element of an offense, the offense is one of “mental culpability.”
(Acts 1977, No. 607, p. 812, §310.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 1984–2015 · leading case: Ex Parte Edwards, 816 So. 2d 98 (Ala. 2001).
Ex Parte Edwards, 816 So. 2d 98 (Ala. 2001). “" [11] Then, the Use Note correctly concludes: "The judge should insert the appropriate mens rea element considering the indictment and the evidence before the court.”
Sullens v. State, 878 So. 2d 1216 (Ala. Crim. App. 2003). “'11 Then, the Use Note correctly concludes: "`The judge should insert the appropriate mens rea element considering the indictment and the evidence before the court.”
Scott v. State, 917 So. 2d 159 (Ala. Crim. App. 2005). “"11 Then, the Use Note correctly concludes: "`"The judge should insert the appropriate mens rea element considering the indictment and the evidence before the court.”
Harrison v. State, 879 So. 2d 594 (Ala. Crim. App. 2003). “"11 Then, the Use Note correctly concludes: "`"The judge should insert the appropriate mens rea element considering the indictment and the evidence before the court.”
Ex Parte Murry, 455 So. 2d 72 (Ala. 1984). “If that conduct is all that is required for commission of a particular offense, or if an offense or some material element thereof does not require a culpable mental state on the part of the actor, the offense is one of `strict liability.”
King v. State, 574 So. 2d 921 (Ala. Crim. App. 1990). “See generally § 13A-2-3 (Commentary at 27). In contrast, not all "sexual contact" or genital exposure, or enticement of children is or could, constitutionally, be proscribed under the other sexual offense statutes.”
State of Alabama v. Thornal Lee Adams., 91 So. 3d 724 (Ala. Crim. App. 2010). “Section 13A-2-3, Ala.Code 1975, specifically provides that "[t]he minimum requirement for criminal liability is the performance by a person of conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act which he or she is physically capable of performing.”
Johnson v. State, 620 So. 2d 661 (Ala. Crim. App. 1991). “” Ala.Code 1975, § 13A-2-3. “If a culpable mental state on the part of the actor is required with respect to any material element of an offense, the offense is one of ‘mental culpability.”
Frye v. State, 185 So. 3d 1156 (Ala. Crim. App. 2015). “See' generally § 13A-2-3 (Commentary at 27). “In contrast, not all ‘sexual contact’ or genital exposure, or enticement of children is or could, constitutionally, be proscribed under the other sexual offense statutes.”
Bettis v. State, 534 So. 2d 1135 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988). “Section 13A-2-3, Code of Alabama 1975 states the following: “The minimum requirement for criminal liability is the performance by a person of conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act which he is physically capable of performing.”
Phillips v. State, 771 So. 2d 1061 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998). “Although traditionally mental culpability or some degree of blameworthiness has been considered essential to a finding of criminal liability, this view has been modified to recognize that lawmakers may enact provisions in which a person who does a prohibited act does so at his…”
Turner v. State, 584 So. 2d 864 (Ala. Crim. App. 1990). “The court maintained this position even after the jury recessed its deliberations and requested answers to the following questions: “If a person has a physical problem or is in shock, is he held responsible for leaving the scene of an accident? “Is the jury responsible for…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.