Criminal Law Test 1
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
