Criminal Law Outline

CRIMINAL LAW LILQUIST SPRING 2011
 
I.                      INTRODUCTION
A.                   Crimes     
1.                Classification
a.                   Felonies: offenses punishable by death or imprisonment in state prison
b.                  Misdemeanors: offenses punishable by fines &/or local jail
B.                   Burden of Proof
1.                P has burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt (due process clause of 5th amendment; examined in In re Winship)
a.                   Far worse to convict innocent man than to let guilty man go free (presumption of innocence)
2.                P must prove every element of charge BRD
a.                   Prima Facie case – state has successfully proved its burden
3.                D strategies:
a.                   Attack P’s case (create RD)
b.                  Affirmative Defenses
i.             Shifts burden of proof, but standard is lowered to, e.g.:
·         Preponderance of evidence
·         Clear & convincing evidence
4.                Owens v. State (14):
a.                   Man found drunk in car that was turned on; charged with DUI. 
b.                  Held: D cannot be convicted for crime he is about to commit; as long as there is rational argument for conviction, appellate court should uphold it.
5.                Directed verdict (Curley, 18): If reas. person must have a reasonable doubt, directed verdict of NG.  If not, issue is sent to jury.
C.                   Reasons for Appeal
a.                   Error of law: bad jury instructions
b.                  Insufficiency of Evidence (like Owens): not enough evidence to convict (way the law is applied to the facts)
D.                   Jury Nullification
1.                Jury acquittals are irreversible if no reason stated. (5th am. double jeopardy clause)
2.                Discretion of power is entrusted to juries
3.                No right to JN, but $ power (right to impartial jury in 6th amendment does not include JN)
4.                Judges generally don’t inform juries of their power to nullify (not prohibited)
5.                Arguments AGAINST:
a.                   Informing people could cause lawlessness
b.                  Juries in charge of fact, not law
c.                   Can be used to perpetuate biases and prejudices –> just as many malignant nullifications as benign (could have jury in South refusing to convict white man of lynching) (Leopold)
d.                  People v. Williams (SI, 1) (Cal.):  D told jurors they needed to fairly apply the law, and if law wasn’t being applied fairly, they could take action.  Juror came to judge expressing other juror’s (X) refusal to uphold law.  X was dismissed.
i.             No instruction regarding JN is necessary
ii.           Jurors can be removed for refusing to comply with the law if they express their beliefs to judge
iii.         Professional misconduct to tell people to nullify
e.                   Race-based nullification (Leopold): gives cause to exclude black jurors & thus may advance causes of racial bigotry; does not address root of problem
6.                Arguments FOR:
a.                   Judgment represents “conscience of community”
b.                  Protects against gov’t oppression (democratic)
c.                   Prevents moral injustices
d.                  Paul Butler:
i.             Encourages race-based jury nullification for all victimless crimes
ii.           Black self-help mitigates disproportionate # of blacks in prison
II.                   JUSTIFICATIONS FOR PUNISHMENT
A.                   Utilitarian: treats punishment as a means to an end; forward-looking
1.                Incapacitation
a.                   Take D out of society to prevent him from commit more crimes
b.                  Limitations:
i.             Incomplete/Ineffective: no improvement, possible decline in attitude (e.g., crime ring in prison)
ii.           Crudeness
iii.         Capacity/Expense: jails are getting full; focuses upon groups w/ greatest likelihood of recidivism
iv.         Selective incapacitation for recidivists might not be selective enough: over-crowding
v.           “Slots”: new criminals fill place of old ones
vi.         Cost to maintain prison
vii.       People get old & stop committing crimes @ some point
viii.     Probation might be more effective in stopping crim. activity & alleviating stress on crim. welfare system
2.                Detterence
a.                   Threat of punishment will prevent people from committing crime
b.                  General: community will observe punishment of others and not want to commit crimes
i.             Limitations
·                  Low risk crimes è little deterrence
·                  Assumes criminals are rational creatures
·                  Actual guilt or innocence doesn’t matter
·                  Uncertainty limits leverage –> if risk is low, amount of punishment is irrelevant
·                  No social science evidence as to under what circumstances deterrence works best
·                  Information: many people don’t know about punishments/risks
c.                   Specific: criminal will carry experience w/ him & not commit again
i.             Limitations
·                  Experience may not last long
·                  Cost-benefit structure: returning to society might be more diff. than going back to jail
·                  Backlash: crims may teach each other
3.                Rehabilitation
a.                   Change D’s character so he wants to do things other than commit crimes
b.                  Limitations
i.             Detection is difficult
ii.           Implementation: not enough resources
iii.         Can’t be forced
iv.         Perverse incentives: rewards lawbreakers
v.           Re-assimilation is difficult
vi.         Selectivity – focuses resources on people who have shorter sentences
B.                   Non-Utilitarian: punishment for its own sake; backward-looking
1.                Retribution
a.                   Holding people responsible for choices they make (good v. evil)
b.                  Punitive principle: encourages more punishment than usual
c.                   Limiting principle: proportionality is necessary
i.