Criminal Law Outline

Criminal Law Outline
Professor Hughes(University of Iowa Law School)
Spring 2015
 
Basic Principles of Criminal Law
Aim of Criminal Law
Operates by a series of directions or commands (must do or must not do)
Binds everyone “who falls within their terms” (even if not formulated in advance in words)
Subject to one or more sanctions for breaking it which community is prepared to enforce
will enforce through punishment
Elements of Criminal Law
Actus reus: a prohibited act à social harm
Mens rea: a prohibited mental state
: links action with the social harm
: connection between actus reus and mens rea
(cf.) Motive is not an element.
Four Main Objectives of Punishment (Haven or Hell: Lorton Prison)
Deterrence
General deterrence: pressure that the example of criminal’s pain and suffering exerts on other potential criminals to forego their contemplated crimes
People v. Suitte: First time offender caught carrying a gun without a license. This violated the 1980 NY gun law. Trial judge sentence to 30 days in jail and 3 year probation. Defendant appealed, on the grounds that he did not feel that the law was applicable for him and was unduly harsh for a first offense. Held. The jail time is appropriate in order to enforce the law.
“unreal and unworkable” (some do not calculate, some do – punishment to deter others from committing same or similar offenses in the future)
Specific deterrence: pressure from unpleasant memories of punishment on convicted person to not break the law again
Rehabilitation: acquisition of skills or values to convert the criminal into law abiding citizen
Retribution: make them “pay” for what they did
Isolation: separating the person from society to protect society from harm
Statutory Interpretation [Dauray- child pornography “visual depiction” pg. 66] Goals/Methods of Statutory Interpretation
Plain Meaning: basic dictionary definition and placement of words w/in the whole
Canons of Construction:
Lists and other associated terms
Noscitur a sociis – meaning of doubtful terms or phrases may be determined by reference to their relationship w/other associated words or phrases
Ejusdem generis – where general words follow a specific list, the general words should be limited to things similar to those specifically enumerated
Statutory structure: A statute is to be considered in all its parts when construing any one of them.
Statutory amendment: A statute should be construed to be consistent w/ subsequent statutory amendments.
Avoiding absurdity: A statute should be construed in a way that avoids absurd results.
Legislative history: when 1 & 2 fails, resort to legislative history.
Researching other case law to see how similar statutes have been interpreted
Rule of lenity: if the court finds that there are ambiguities in the statute, the ambiguities should be resolved in the Defendant’s favor
This rule springs from due Process requiring that a criminal statute “give fair warning of the conduct that it makes a crime.”
Doctrine of last resort: The Court has always reserved lenity for those situations in which a reasonable doubt persists even after resort to the ‘language and structure, legislative history, and motivating policies’ of the statute.
Constitutional Limits on Power to Punish
14th Amendment: Void for Vagueness
What kind of vagueness invalidates a criminal law?
Fails to provide the kind of NOTICE that would enable ordinary people to understand what conduct it prohibits OR
May authorize (or even encourage) ARBITRARY enforcement
Example: Statute provides that person can be charged with disorderly conduct if he/she loiters without apparent reason and refuses to identify himself and account for his presence when asked by a police officer. The individual must provide “credible and reliable” identification or be arrested.Law is unconstitutional because doesn’t give minimal guidelines to law enforcement or give standard for what suspect has to do to satisfy “credible and reliable” identification. (Kolender v. Lawson)
Example: Anti-gang statute prohibits loitering for one or more suspected gang members and defines loitering as “remaining in any one place with no apparent purpose.”“Apparent purpose” is too vague for ordinary person to know if he or she had an “apparent purpose.” The law provides absolute discretion to police officers to determine what activities constitute loitering and thus, encourages arbitrary enforcement. ( City of Chicago v. Morales)
14th Amendment: Equal Protection
Equal Protection clause that applies to the Fed govt thru the 5th Amendment
Facial Claim: Legislature enacted the statute because of its racially discriminatory purpose—very difficult to show
“As Applied” Claim: the decisionmakers in particular D’s case acted with discriminatory effect—would need exact proof of the particular discrimination.
McCleskey v. Kemp:  D argued that GA’s death penalty violated the 8th and 14th Amendment because it was racially biased and discriminatory. He relied on Baldus’s study that Black Defendents who Killed white victims were 22x more likely to get the death penalty than any other combination of defendant /victim. He wasn’t able to show sufficient proof of discrimination even though Court accepted Baldus’s study. Courts recognize that some apparent disparities in sentencing are inevitable. Challenging the laws would remove prosecutorial and juror discretion.
Brian Stevenson—McCleskey is