Rene Bowser For Criminal Law Spring of 2015
Criminal Law Outline
PRINCIPLES OF PUNISHMENT
I Theories of Punishment
a What is punishment?
i It is performed by and directed at agents who are responsible in some sense.
ii It involves designedly harmful or unpleasant consequences
iii The unpleasant consequences are usually preceded by a judgment of condemnation.
iv The punishment is imposed by someone who has the authority to do so.
v It is imposed for a breach of some established rule of behavior on the actual or supposed violator of the rule.
b Retributivism: Retributivism is based on the principle that people who commit crimes deserve punishment. The moral culpability of the offender gives society a duty to punish.
i Negative Retribution: It is morally wrong to punish an innocent person even if society would benefit from the action.
ii Positive Retribution: Not only must an innocent person never be punished but one who is guilty of an offense must be punished.
c Utilitariansim: Punishment is justified on the basis of the supposed benefits that will accrue from its imposition.
i General deterrence: Knowledge that punishment will follow crime deters people from committing crimes.
ii Individual (specific) Deterrence: To deter an offender from repeating his actions, a penalty should be severe enough to outweigh in his mind the benefits of the crime.
iii Incapacitation: Temporarily puts convicted criminals out of general circulation.
iv Reform: Punishment may help to reform the criminal so that his wish to commit crimes will be lessened.
i How much Punishment should be Enforced?
▪ By using a firearm in the commission of the crime, a defendant is presumptively ineligible for probation except in unusual cases where the interests of justice would best be served if the person is granted probation.
▪ The following facts may indicate the existence of an unusual case in which probation may be granted if otherwise appropriate: A fact or circumstance not amounting to a defense, but reducing defendant’s culpability for the offense, including: (i) Defendant participated in the crime under circumstances of great provocation, coercion, or duress not amounting to a defense, and the defendant has no recent record of committing crimes of violence. (ii) The crime was committed because of a mental condition not amounting to a defense, and there is a high likelihood that the defendant would respond favorably to mental health care and treatment that would be required as a condition of probation. (iii) The defendant is youthful or aged, and has no significant record of prior criminal offenses.
▪ Criteria affecting the decision to grant or deny probation include: Facts relating to the crime, including: (1) The nature, seriousness, and circumstances of the crime as compared to other instances of the same crime. (2) Whether the defendant was armed with or used a weapon. (3) The vulnerability of the victim. (4) Whether the defendant inflicted physical or emotional injury. (5) The degree of monetary loss to the victim. (6) Whether the defendant was an active or passive participant. (7) Whether the crime was committed because of an unusual circumstance, such as great provocation, which is unlikely to recur. (8) Whether the manner in which the crime was carried out demonstrated criminal sophistication or professionalism on the part of the defendant. (9) Whether the defendant took advantage of a position of trust or confidence to commit the crime.
ii Proportionality of Punishment
▪ 8th Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, not excessive fines imposed, nor crime and unusual punishment inflicted. nThe 8th amendment does not require strict proportionality between crime and sentence, rather it forbids only extreme sentences that are grossly disproportionate to the crime. The death penalty is disproportionate punishment for the crime of rape. A punishment is “excessive” and unconstitutional if it (1) makes no measurable contribution to acceptable goals of punishment and hence is nothing more than the purposeless and needless imposition of pain and suffering; or (2) is grossly out of proportion to the severity of the crime. Statutory aggravating circumstances must be found before the death penalty may be imposed. (Coker v. Georgia)Trial courts may avoid imposing a three strikes sentence in two ways: first, by reducing “wobblers” to misdemeanors (which do not qualify as triggering offenses), and second, by vacating allegations of prior “serious” or “violent” felony convictions. (Ewing v. California)Factors relating to a determination of whether a sentence is so disproportionate that it violates the 8th amendment: 1) gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty; 2) sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction; 3) sentences imposed for the commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions (Solem v. Helm)
ACTUS REUS
II Voluntary Acts
d Actus Reus: The physical or external part of the crime
e MensRea: The mental or internal ingredient
f Result Crime: The offense seeks to prevent or punish a harmful result.
g Conduct crime: No bad result is required to be guilty of such an offense. The law prohibits specific, dangerous behavior.
h An accusation of drunkenness in a designated public place cannot be established by proof that the accused, while in an intoxicated condition, was voluntarily and forcibly carried to that place by the arresting officer. (martin v. state)
i Homicide: The killing of a human being by the act, procurement or omission of another and is either (1) murder, (2) manslaughter, (3) excusable homicide or (4) justifiable homicide.
j Automatism: The existence in any person of behavior of which he is unaware and over which he has no conscious control. An act committed while one is unconscious is in reality no act at all. Unconsciousness does not in all cases provide a defense to a crime. When the state of unconsciousness is voluntarily induced through the use and consumption of alcohol or drugs, that state of unconsciousness does not attain the stature of a complete defense.
k Manslaughter: criminal int
ry is the commission of a battery where an offender intentionally or knowingly causes great bodily harm or permanent disability or disfigurement. Because the offense is defined in terms of result, the state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant either has a conscious objective to achieve the harm defined, or that defendant is consciously aware that the harm defined is practically certain to be caused by his conduct
▪ Intent: Intent can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances, the offender’s words, the weapon used, and the force of the blow. (People v.Conley).In the context of result crimes, intent ordinarily is defined to include not only the results that are the conscious object of the actor but also those that the actor knows are virtually certain to occur from his conduct, even if he does not want them to arise. The ordinary presumption is that one intends the natural and probable consequences of his actions.
▪ Transferred intent: When a person means to cause harm to one person and accidentally causes it to another, courts typically assert the doctrine of transferred intent.
▪ General intent v. specific intent: culpability & elemental elements of intent
Specific intent: An offense in which the mental state is expressly set out in the definition of the crime. (elemental)
General intent: In some circumstances it refers to offenses where no particular state is set out in the definition of the crime and the prosecutor need only prove actus reus was committed with a morally blameworthy state of mind. (culpability)
▪ General intent v. specific intent: Mens rea element of intent
Specific intent: Used to denote an offense that contains in its definition the mens rea element of intent or knowledge.
General intent: Reserved for crimes that permit conviction on the basis of a less culpable standard such an recklessness or negligence.
▪ General intent v. specific intent: Most common usage
Specific intent: A special mental element which is required above and beyond any mental state required with respect to the actus reus of the crime. 1) an intention to commit some future act separate from the actus reus of the offense; 2) an offense may require proof of a special motive or purpose for committing the actus reus; 3) proof of awareness of an attendant circumstance.
General intent: Any mental state, expressed or implied, in the definition of the offense that relates solely to the acts that constitute the criminal offense.
