Criminal Law Test 1

¡Supera tus tareas y exámenes ahora con Quizwiz!

state criminal codes

criminal law created by elected representatives in state legislatures

U.S. Criminal Code

criminal law created by the U.S. Congress

compensatory damages

damages recovered by tort plaintiffs for their actual injuries

punitive damages

damages recovered by tort plaintiffs to punish the defendant for their "evil behavior"

affirmative defenses

defendants have to "start matters off by putting in some evidence in support" of their defenses of justification and excuse

burden of persuasion

defendants have to prove their justification or excuse defenses by a preponderance of the evidence

justice

depends on culpability; only those who deserve punishment ought to receive it

felonies against property

the core offenses of felonious theft, robbery, arson, and burglary

deterrence

the use of punishment to prevent or reduce future crimes

burden of proof

to have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt "every fact necessary to constitute the crime charged"

burden of production

to make defendants responsible for presenting evidence in their own justification or excuse defense

administrative crimes

violations of federal and state agency rules that make up a controversial but rapidly growing source of criminal law

cruel and unusual punishments

"barbaric" punishments and punishments that are disproportionate to the crime committed

opinion

"the point of the story"; the court backs up its judgment by explaining how and why it applied the law (general principles and the elements of crimes) to the facts of the case

Second Amendment

"the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home"

classical deterrence theory

rational human beings won't commit crimes if they know that the pain of punishment outweighs the pleasure gained from committing crimes

"evolving standards" test

standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society

codified

written definitions of crimes and punishment enacted by legislatures and published

Woollard v. Gallagher

- Abbott was high on drugs and was looking for his wife's keys so he could take her car and drive to get more drugs. During the break in, Woollard obtained a shotgun and aimed it at Abbott, but Abbott managed to get the shotgun away from him. Woollard's son took the opportunity to aim a second gun at Abbott. - Woollard challenged the constitutionality of the good-and-substantial-reason requirement to own a handgun. This case examines the exact rights that the second amendment protects. - Started in the US District Court where the Judge denied Woollard's right to be issued a handgun permit. The defendants decided to appeal bringing the case to the US Court of Appeals; where the ruling was then reversed.

Carol Anne Bond v. United States

- Best friend pregnant with her husband's baby - Chemical arsenic - Was the arsenic a chemical weapon? - Found guilty

State v. Ninham

- Crapeau and Ninham continued to assault Vang and grabbed him by his ankles and wrists. Ninham decided to let go of Vangs wrists, which led to Vang falling to his death. - The question before the court is the constitutionality of imposing a death-in-prison sentence on a 14-year-old juvenile boy who committed an intentional, brutal, senseless, grotesque, reprehensible murder of a 13-year-old innocent stranger. - Ninham was charged with intentional homicide with life in prison without parole.

Lawrence v. Texas

- John Geddes Lawrence, was caught by the dispatched police officers having consensual sex with Tyron Garner upon gaining entry into Lawrence's residence. Sex between two adults of the same gender was considered a Class C misdemeanor by Texas Penal Code. - Are sexual acts between two consenting adults of the same gender protected by the right to privacy by liberty as implied by the Constitution? - Overturned

Kennedy v. Louisiana

- Patrick Kennedy was charged in the state of Louisiana for the aggravated rape of his eight year old step-daughter. The jury found Kennedy guilty of raping L.H. and decided he should be sentenced to death for his heinous crime. - Are states in violation of the 8th Amendment, cruel and unusual punishment, if they implement a death penalty for child rapists? - The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the death penalty could not be enforced in a rape case regardless of the age of the victim.

State v. Metzger

- The officers testified that they observed Metzger standing in front of the window eating a bowl of cereal. They testified that Metzger was standing within a foot of the window and his nude body, from the mid-thigh on up, was visible. - Is ordinance § 9.52.100 so vague that charging someone criminally with it is unconstitutional? - They found ordinance § 9.52.100 is so vague as to be unconstitutional and declared it invalid. Due to the supreme court finding the ordinance invalid, the District Courts conviction must be thrown out.

Ewing v. California

- Walked into a pro-shop on a golf course in El Segundo, Ca., and stole 3 golf clubs after being released from jail on prior offenses. Had been convicted of four "serious or violent felonies" which lead him to be convicted under three-strikes law and sentenced to twenty-five years to life. - Is stealing three golf clubs really deserving of a sentence of twenty-five to life? Is that cruel and unusual punishment? - The California State Supreme Court held the sentencing saying it does not violate the 8th prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Gall v. U.S.

- Was a marijuana, cocaine, and ecstasy user and dealt ecstasy under a conspiracy at the University of Iowa. After two months of dealing, Gall stopped using drugs and a few months after withdrew from the conspiracy and "self-rehabilitated". Sentenced to 36 months of probation - Did the probation sentence abuse the trial judge's discretion? - Ruled that the court of appeal's decision was reversed and that the district court's sentencing was fair.

Commonwealth v. William P. Johnson and Commonwealth v. Gail M. Johnson

- William and Gail Johnson were convicted for criminal cyber harassment for a series of "pranks" they committed against their neighbor, James "Jim" Lyons and his wife Bernadette and their son Riley. There were five incidents in all that, under the Massachusetts statute for criminal harassment, culminated in a single charge. - Constitutionality of the criminal harassment statue G.L. c. 265, § 43A and its application to acts of cyber harassment among others. - The Court held that the evidence presented against the Johnsons at trial was sufficient to support the verdicts rendered by the jury. Judgments Affirmed

municipal codes

criminal law created by city and town councils elected by city residents

ex post facto laws

a retroactive law that does one of three things: (1) criminalizes an act that wasn't a crime when it was committed, (2) increases the punishment for a crime after the crime was committed, or (3) takes away a defense that was available to a defendant when the crime was committed

constitutional right to privacy

a right that bans "all governmental invasions of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life"

fundamental right to privacy

a right that requires the government to prove that a compelling interest justifies invading it

hard punishment

a sentence of a year or more in prison

concurring opinion

agrees with the conclusions of either the majority or the dissenting opinion but provides different reasons for reaching the conclusion

rehabilitation

aims to prevent future crimes by changing individual offenders so they'll want to play by the rules and won't commit any more crimes in the future

specific deterrence

aims to reduce crime by inflicting the actual punishment to convince offenders not to commit crimes in the future

general deterrence

aims to reduce crime by the threat of punishment to convince criminal wannabes in the general population to not commit a crime in the future

police power

all federal, state, and local governments' executive, legislative, and judiciary's power, including uniformed police officers, to carry out and enforce the criminal law

clear and present danger doctrine

allows the government to punish words that "produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest"

plurality opinion

an opinion that represents the reasoning of the greatest number (but less than a majority) of justices

administrative agencies

appointed participants in creating criminal law that assist the U.S. Congress

criminal liability

conduct that unjustifiably and inexcusably inflicts or threatens substantial harm to individual or public interests

criminal court opinions

create criminal law by interpreting state and municipal criminal codes

criminal law enforcement agencies

create criminal law through informal discretionary law making to decide how the criminal law process works on a day-to-day basis

"medical model" of criminal law

crime is a "disease" and criminals are "sick" in need of "treatment" and "cure"

felonies

crimes punishable by death or confinement in the state's prison for one year to life without parole

punishment imagination

crimes that fit within the criminal law imagination and that the law should punish by locking people up

"not guilty" verdict

doesn't mean "innocent"; it means that the government didn't prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt

federal system

fifty-two criminal codes, one for each of the fifty states, one for the District of Columbia, and one for the U.S. criminal code

appellate courts

in most states and the federal government, the two levels of appeals courts: an intermediate court of appeals and a supreme court

fair notice

in vague laws, it isn't whether the defendant knows there's a law against the act but whether an ordinary, reasonable person would know that the act is a crime

retributionists

inflicting on offenders physical and psychological pain ("hard treatment") so that they can pay for their crimes

three-strikes laws

intended to make sure that offenders who are convicted of a third felony get locked up for a very long time (sometimes for life)

punishment

intentionally inflicting pain or other unpleasant consequences on another person

"guilty" verdict

legally, not necessarily factually, guilty; it means the government proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt

preponderance of the evidence

more than 50 percent of the evidence proves justification or excuse

principle of legality

no one can be convicted of, or punished for, a crime unless the law defined the crime and prescribed the punishment before the person engaged in the behavior that was defined as a crime

expressive conduct

nonverbal actions that communicate ideas and feelings

misdemeanors

offenses punishable by fine and/or confinement in the local jail for up to one year

mala prohibita offenses

offenses that are crimes only because a specific statute or ordinance prohibits them

mala in se (inherently evil) crimes

offenses that require some level of criminal intent

culpability

only someone who intends to harm her victim deserves punishment; accidents don't qualify

Apprendi rule

other than the fact of prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt

criminal punishment

penalties that meet four criteria: (1) inflict pain or other unpleasant consequences; (2) prescribe a punishment in the same law that defines the crime; (3) administered intentionally; (4) administered by the state

principle of utility

permits only the minimum amount of pain necessary to prevent the crime

incapacitation

prevents convicted criminals from committing future crimes by locking them up, or more rarely, by altering them surgically or executing them

torts

private wrongs for which you can sue the party who wronged you and recover money

Model Penal Code (MPC)

proposed criminal code drafted by the American Law Institute and used to reform criminal codes

void-for-overbreadth doctrine

protects speech guaranteed by the First Amendment by invalidating laws written so broadly that the fear of prosecution creates a "chilling effect" that discourages people from exercising that freedom

preventionists

punishment is only a means to a greater good, usually the prevention or at least the reduction of future crime

barbaric punishments

punishments considered no longer acceptable to civilized society

criminal law imagination

the contributions of law, history, philosophy, the social sciences, and sometimes biology to explain the moral desires we wish to impose on the world

felonies against persons

the core offenses of murder, manslaughter, rape, kidnapping, and robbery

judgement

the court's judgement (sometimes called the court's "decision") is how the court disposes of the case

social reality of U.S. criminal law

the dual nature of U.S. criminal law divided into two categories: a small number of serious, core offenses and a large number of lesser crimes, or "everything else"

proof beyond a reasonable doubt

the highest burden of proof in the U.S. Criminal justice system reserved for criminal cases; the prosecution must prove every element of the crime charged to this standard

rule of law

the idea that government power should be defined and limited by laws

majority opinion

the law of the case; the opinion of the majority of the justices on the court who participated in the case

court's holding

the legal rule the court has decided to apply to the facts of the cases

constitutional democracy

the majority can't make a crime out of conduct protected by the fundamental rights in the U.S. Constitution

hedonism

the natural law that human beings seek pleasure and avoid pain

rationalism

the natural law that individuals can act to maximize pleasure and minimize pain, permitting human beings to apply natural laws mechanistically (according to rules) instead of having to rely on the discretionary judgment of individual decision makers

case citation

the numbers, letters, and punctuation that tell you where to locate the full case report; they follow the title of a case in the excerpts or in the bibliography at the end of the book

void-for-vagueness doctrine

the principle that statutes violate due process if they don't define a crime and its punishment clearly enough for ordinary people to know what is lawful

principle of proportionality

the punishment has to fit the crime

court's reasoning

the reasons the court gives to support its holding

narrow lenity rule

the requirement of courts to interpret ambiguous statutes in favor of defendants only in the core felony cases and other crimes requiring fault

rule of lenity

the requirement of courts to resolve every ambiguity in a criminal statute in favor of the defendant

theories of criminal punishment

ways of thinking about the purposes of criminal punishment

trial courts

where the cases for the state and the defense are presented; their witnesses and the physical evidence are introduced; and the fact finders (juries in jury trials or judges in nonjury bench trials) decide what the "true" story is and whether the evidence all adds up to proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt

presumption of innocence

which means that the prosecution has the burden of proof when it comes to proving the criminal act and intent


Conjuntos de estudio relacionados

17:4 Providing First Aid for Shock

View Set

From Jesus to Christ Part I and 2

View Set

Formulas for Volume of Spheres and Cylinders

View Set

Quiz Chapter 23 Digestive System

View Set

Inquizitive Ch. 1 Western Civilization

View Set