Criminal Law

Front 1

Nature of Criminal law

Back 1

1. Blames and punishes people for crimes
2. Through social control (controlled by the way people look at you, etc.)
3. To protect public interest (the purpose)

Front 2

Differences in Crim vs. Civil Law

Back 2

1. Legal counsel
2. Case initiation (state vs. plaintiff/claimant)
3. Burden of proof
4. Punishment
5. Name (___ vs. state or ___ vs. ___)
6. 5th Amendment

Front 3

Theories of Punishment

Back 3

1. Retribution
2. Deterrence (specific and general)
3. Incapacitation
4. Restoration
5. Rehabilitation

Front 4

Mala In Se

Back 4

Morally evil
Crimes against person
Ex. murder, rape

Front 5

Mala Prohibita

Back 5

Only illegal because law says so
Ex. underage drinking

Front 6

Model Penal Code

Back 6

Advisory penal code
Developed by American Law Institute
No state has adopted it entirely (37 states have parts)

Front 7

Federal Criminal Code

Back 7

Congress makes the laws regarding:
Interstate commerce
Declaration of war
Provide for national defense
Coin money
Impose taxes
Operates post office
Immigration regulation

Front 8

Supremacy Clause

Back 8

Federal law supersedes state law where federal law exists

Front 9

Dual Sovereignty

Back 9

Federal and state share power, states have police power

Front 10

Constitution limits government power to...

Back 10

Protect from:
Unlimited police state (federal and state) power
Democratic Majority
Balance between social order and inalienable rights

Front 11

Constitution prohibits certain kinds of laws such as...

Back 11

1. Bills of attainder
2. Ex post facto laws
3. Laws that do not have statutory clarity

Front 12

Bills of attainder

Back 12

Punishment without trial and imposes capital punishment

Front 13

Ex Post Facto Laws

Back 13

1. Criminalizes an action after the fact
2. Increases (aggravates) a crime after the fact
3. Increases the punishment after the fact
4. Alteration of legal rules of evidence for conviction after the fact
-Law can't be retroactively applied to a crime committed before the law was put into action (or to increase punishment to a crime already committed)
-However, not all are unconstitutional such as sex offender registry because it wasn't a punishment or regulatory laws such as DV offenders not owning firearms

Front 14

Substantive law

Back 14

Law that creates and defines legal rights and duties

Front 15

Procedural law

Back 15

How the law is enforced

Front 16

Statutory Clarity

Back 16

Must be clear and understandable
Otherwise deemed "void for vagueness"
Ex. US v. Lonnie Ray Davis

Front 17

Overbreadth

Back 17

Statutes must focus only on prohibited conduct (what exactly is criminal; can't be too broad)
Cannot prohibit constitutionally protected behavior (such as protests and free speech)

Front 18

Equal Protection Clause

Back 18

Prohibits:
1. Deprivation of life, liberty, and property without due process of law
2. Denial of anyone equal protection of the law
-5th Amendment: due process (fed) & 14th Amendment: due process, clause (states)

Front 19

Three Levels of Analysis

Back 19

1. Rational basis: minimum scrutiny (Presumed valid if related to state interest, ex. drinking age, voting age, driving age, mental capacity & competence)
2. Intermediate scrutiny: significantly related to important government objective, must be factual difference not generalization (ex. gender)
3. Strict scrutiny: must be no other alternative when in regard to race/ethnicity or limit fundamental rights (ex. white male juries, interracial marriage, freedom of speech)

Front 20

Privacy in Law

Back 20

"Privacy" not in constitution but implied by other constitutional protections

Context important when considering privacy such as in a school no need for probable cause (Safford Unified School District v. April Redding)

Comes from Griswold v. Connecticut: court rules not issuing birth control to married individuals as personal business

Front 21

Privacy Protections

Back 21

1. Sanctity of the home (and personal space from arbitrary govnt interference)
2. Intimate activities (lifestyle, body, reproduction)
3. Information (prevent collection/disclosure of intimate or incriminating info)
4. Public portrayal (prevent use of picture or endorsement without permission, prevent from false portrayal by media)

Front 22

Types of Sentencing

Back 22

1. Determinate sentences (where a statute specifically lays out punishment, exact amount of fine or how long the incarceration is; ex. 3 strikes laws)
2. Mandatory minimum sentences (the minimum amount of punishment a judge can prescribe, can't go below)
3. Indeterminate sentences (statute gives a range that judge can go between for incarceration)
4. Presumptive sentencing guidelines (set of policies put forth by legislature, sentencing guide, long list of behavior and corresponding sentencing)
5. Consecutive sentences (sentences served one after the other)
6. Concurrent sentences (served at the same time)
7. Pardon (charge/sentence wiped away, ex. wrongful conviction cases)
8. Clemency (commutation = sentence reduced, reprieve = sentence held off)
9. Plea Bargain (happens in most cases, prosecution/defense strike a deal)

Front 23

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Back 23

8th Amendment

Prohibits:
1. Certain punishment methods (for incarceration and for capital punishment; still get medical attention, still get fed, etc.)
2. Amount of punishment
3. Criminal punishment of certain acts (different punishments for different crimes or severity)

Punishment must fit the crime

Societal standards of decency (evolving with the time)

Front 24

Death Penalty

Back 24

Not cruel and unusual punishment

1. Need for retribution
2. Deterrence

Furman v. Georgia - the application of the death penalty was unconstitutional because disproportionately applied to Blacks, moratorium on DP

Gregg v. Georgia - Reinstate use of DP with specific standards to ensure fair application
1. Bifurcated trials
2. Jury must fit punishment to the crime, look at character and record, look at circumstances of the act

Roper v. Simmons - as of 2005, unconstitutional to put to death under 18

Front 25

Actus reus

Back 25

The criminal act (or failure to act) required for a crime to occur

Three components:
1. Act or failure to act
2. Cause
3. Social harm condemned by law

Must be paired with mens rea

Front 26

Status Offenses

Back 26

USSC ruled unconstitutional laws that punish a status or condition (Robinson v. California - convicted for having heroin tracks even though not caught actually using drugs)

Front 27

Voluntariness

Back 27

Willed bodily movements

vs. Involuntary acts such as reflex, convulsion, bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep, conduct during hypnosis, etc

Front 28

Omissions

Back 28

Failure to act or negative act

For conviction must show:
1. knowledge of the peril
2. failure to act
3. caused the harm

Front 29

American v. European Bystander Rule

Back 29

American = you don't have to intervene or have to act except when you have certain responsibilities or fall into a certain category

European = you have to help

Front 30

American Bystander Rules must intervene categories

Back 30

1. Status between two people (parent/child, parent has duty to act, spouses)
2. Duty to intervene (Doctors to patients, anything by statute such as doctors mandatory reporting of child abuse)
3. Contractual obligation (similar to above but not by statute such as babysitter or assisted living facility)
4. Assumption of duty (no contract just assuming duty such as driving home a drunk friend, differentiate from #3 by not having other person's consent
5. Creator of peril (put the other person in danger in the first place)
6. Direct duty of care (employers or military chain of command)
7. On land of a property owner

Front 31

Possession

Back 31

Actus reas (deemed as an act)

3 things needed to prove:
1. knowledge of the presence of the substance or object
2. knowledge of what the substance is
3. somehow in your control or a place you exercise control over

Front 32

Types of Possession

Back 32

1. Actual possession (on your body/person or within your reach)
2. Constructive (in somewhere where you exercise control such as your room even if not there)
3. Joint (2 people exercise control over the same area, if in living room still charged if not yours because common area)
4. Knowing possession - MPC (knowing that you are in possession of something, if you did not know it was there not held responsible)
5. Mere possession (on you or in control but don't know can still be charged)

Front 33

Mens rea

Back 33

Criminal intent (punishment hinges on it because can be charged differently depending on if it is there or not)

Mala in se - proof of intent
Mala prohibita - don't need intent, strict liability

Front 34

Types of Intent

Back 34

1. General - intent to commit the act (labeled as a crime), ex. trespass, arson, possession
2. Specific - general + specific intent of a specific intent crime, differentiates between crimes, ex. trespass and burglary (for burglary not just going on someone else's property but also to steal something) or distribution and possession
3. Transferred - focusing on harming one person but harms another, intent transferred because original intent present
4. Constructive Intent - more of a general intent, not specifically intending to hurt one individual, just know there is a possibility that someone will get hurt, act in a grossly and wantonly reckless manner, ex. reckless driving

Front 35

MPC Intent

Back 35

In place of general and specific intent
1. Purposely - when someone causes harm on purpose, purposely killing someone, worst type of intent
2. Knowingly - slightly below, doing an action that will almost certainly hurt someone or result in a crime, not necessarily on purpose but know it is inevitable that a crime or injury will result
3. Recklessly - slightly below, commit an action and there is a strong probability that a crime or harm will result, deviating from the standard of care given by a law abiding citizen (acting in a way a law abiding citizen would not)
4. Negligently - acting in harmful manner but not really aware of the risk, deviation from the standard of care given by a reasonable person

Front 36

Concurrence

Back 36

Link required between the criminal act and intent, timing relationship between the two
Must have intent before or while you are committing the crime
Proved beyond a reasonable doubt

Front 37

Strict Liability

Back 37

Mala prohibita, does not require intent, only an act/omission

Posses a danger to a large number of people - "public welfare offenses"

State v. Walker - Dealing cocaine within 1000 ft of a school, didn't need knowledge or intent

Front 38

Causation

Back 38

Criminal act must cause a particular harm or result

Prosecution must prove:
1. defendant committed the act
2. the act caused the criminal outcome

Ensures individual responsibility and fairness of punishment

Think about chain of events

Front 39

Types of Causation

Back 39

1. Factual Causation - the act must be the cause in fact, the "but, for" test, sets chain of events in motion that resulted in crime or injury
2. Legal or proximate cause - to hold the defendant responsible, intervening causes may exist, examine the causation chain to make sure that the person is responsible for the result

Front 40

Intervening Acts

Back 40

Independent intervening cause - reasonable person would not have reasonably forseen, severs the causal chain of events and initial actor no longer proximate cause of harm (i.e. not legally liable)

Coincidental intervening act - acts of coincidence, outcome resulting from "normal and foreseeable" or "reasonably predicted" events, legally liable in these situations

Front 41

Common Law Parties to Crime

Back 41

Principles in the 1st degree = commit
Principles in the 2nd degree = assist
Accessory before the fact = prepare
Accessory after the fact = aid after

Most jurisdictions no longer use the common law approach to parties of crime

Front 42

Current Parties to Crime

Back 42

Accomplices = before & during crime (same charge and sentence as principle)

Accessories = assists after crime (separate and usually lesser charge)
-derivative liability - no mens rea but extends to them

Front 43

Corporate Liability

Back 43

Respondent Superior: extends acts of employees to the corporation

MPC limits acts to approved or tolerated by high-level officials (ex. CEO, board, etc.)

Front 44

Attempt

Back 44

1. An act toward the completion of a crime + 2. specific intent or purpose to commit the attempted crime + 3. failure to complete the crime (otherwise not attempt)

Mens rea - intent to commit a crime, ex. attempted murder by the archer

Front 45

Types of Attempt

Back 45

1. complete, yet imperfect - every step necessary yet fails
2. incomplete - abandons or is prevented
3. impossible - mistake

Front 46

Legal Tests of Attempt

Back 46

Depends on court and state as to which is used
1. Objective test - act must come extremely close to the commission of the crime (preparation v. acts), stress the danger posed by a defendant's acts
2. Subjective test - focuses on the individual's intent rather than acts, society should intervene at first step toward commission, stresses the danger posed by a defendant who possesses a criminal intent

Front 47

Conspiracy

Back 47

1. Agreement between two or more people to commit a crime (or agreement & overt act in furtherance of the agreement)
2. Specific intent/purpose to commit a crime (some courts employ a knowledge standard)

Why punish conspiracy?
-intervention protects society (can be arrested in planning stages)
-group crime results are more severe than individual crime

Does not merge into attempt of completed crime

Pinkerton rule - one guilty of all act