Criminal Law I Outline

The Criminal Justice system

a. The proper goals of the Criminal Justice System. y To prevent crime from occurring through the threat of punishment (deterrence). y To punish those who commit crimes. y Incapacitate wrong-doers y Restitution (paying a debt to those affected by the crime). What should the goals be? y Rehabilitation y Better education y Deterrence y Protection against major tyranny. The extent to which the US criminal justice system is effective in accomplishing any of those goals. y The U.S. is successful at protecting our citizens rights, yet we still have a very high crime rate and number of incarcerated criminals. Why the U.S. incarceration rate (700 hundred per hundred thousand citizens) is six to ten times higher than the incarceration rates in other industrialized nations. y Most jurisdictions rely solely on incarceration for punishment. y There is little focus on rehabilitating offenders. y Politicians continually increase minimum sentences to show the public they are tough on crime.

b.

c.

d.

Judy Norman State v. Norman (1988) Facts: Defendant-Norman was the victim of severe domestic abuse from her husband. She and several witnesses claim that she was verbally and physically abused for twenty years, developing battered spouse syndrome. Defendant s husband laid down for a nap. Defendant went to her mother s house to retrieve a pistol. She returned to her home and fatally shot victim twice in the head. Defendant claims that she believed her life was in imminent danger. Trial court s verdict was guilty. Court of Appeals reversed. Issue: Does the victim s passiveness at the time of the killing preclude the Defendant from asserting self-defense? Holding: No, victim s passiveness at the time of the killing does not constitute self defense. Reasoning: If the court accepted the defendant s claim of self defense, the definition of imminent bodily harm would be stretched and thus substantially more indefinite. e. How is the criminal justice system different from the civil system? y The criminal justice system defines, tries, and punishes crimes deemed criminal by the community which it serves.

f.

Crimes are conduct which the community decided will incur a formal and solemn pronouncement of moral condemnation. y With the exception of death, the same consequences can be enforced in the civil and criminal systems. y There is a higher burden of proof for the state. What is criminal punishment? Conduct law enforcement and society subjects convicted wrong-doers of in order to achieve the goals of criminal law. The most common form of punishment in the United States is incarceration, but other non-traditional methods are also used: community service, fines). y

Model Penal Code: (MPC) a system of criminal laws devised in 1952 to streamline the understanding of crimes and defenses. MPC 1.04 Classes of Crimes a) Felonies: offenses deemed felonies by statute or those which authorized the offender to be sentences to death or a prison term longer than one year. b) Misdemeanors: Offenses deemed misdemeanors by statute or code. c) Petty Misdemeanors: Offenders are sentences to less than one year of imprisonment. Policy Question: Valuing innocence, is it better to let a guilty person go free than convict an innocent person (Judge Harlan pg.)? Answer: A retributivist would say this is not true because the point of punishment is to reform the wrong-doer. Letting the guilty person go free does nothing to make that person a more valued member of society. While a utilitarian would say that this statement is true, because this philosophy believes that whatever is better for the majority is right. It would not serve the majority to convict an innocent person and to subject them to potential conduct of a guilty person.

Retributive: The wrong-doer must pay a debt to society. The goal of this philosophy is to give the victims of a crime retribution. People deserve punishment simply because they are guilty. To deter and give retribution getting even, eye-for-an-eye mentality. Utilitarian: Humankind is governed by pleasure & pain. The principle of utility approves of actions according to its tendency to promote happiness or diminish pain and suffering. Whatever is better for the majority is right. The proper course of action is one that maximizes the overall good for society. Goals of punishment under utilitarian philosophy: a) General deterrence b) Individual deterrence c) Incapacitation d) Reform Punishment proportionality : (lex talionis) the punishment s severity should match the degree of wrongdoing. Recidivism: The act of one repeating an undesirable act after one has experienced a negative

consequence. g. Should the punishment fit the crime or the criminal? I think that they should fit the criminal, because the kind and severity of the punishment should be determined by more than the present act. A first time offender should not be given the most severe punishment, while a repeat offender should not be given the lightest sentence. h. What is the 8th amendment? This is part of the constitution which prohibits the government from imposing excessive fines and subjecting citizens to cruel and unusual punishment. Many death penalty appeals refer to the 8th amendment. y In 1910 the Supreme Court ruled that the cruel & unusual punishment clause prohibited inflicting torture and that punishment shall not be excessive in length or the severity greatly disproportionate to the offense charged. y To decide what is disproportionate look at other state s statutes. Georgia was Coker v. Georgia: U.S. Supreme Court held that Georgia s law allowing rape offenders to be sentenced to death was unconstitutional, because it violated the 8th amendment which does not allow for punishment to be greatly disproportionate to the offense charged. The court held that although Mrs. Carver was harmed from rape and kidnapping she still had her life. Therefore, putting Coker to death would be disproportionate punishment. Ewing v. California: U.S. Supreme Court held that CA s three strikes you re out rule could not be applied to non-violent felonies. Ewing was convicted of robbery, theft, and passing bad checks. Life in prison without the possibility of parole would be disproportionate punishment for the offenses committed. Graham v. Florida: Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional for sentence minors to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for non-homicide offenses. i. How does the Supreme Court resolve the 8th amendment? The Supreme Court says that the death penalty is not considered cruel and unusual punishment because the methods the states chose are not inherently barbaric (Coker v. Georgia).

Principle of Legality: the idea that no one may be punished unless the conduct has already been deemed a crime also called the Lenity Doctrine. Therefore: (a) Criminal statutes should be clear and understandable to a reasonable person; (b) Statutes cannot be made retrospectively or ad hoc (for this specific situation); and (c) Judicial bias should be towards the accused. Keeler v. Superior Court : Estranged husband beats his wife because she is pregnant with another man s child. He specifically says I m going to stomp it out of you. The fetus was a still born due to a fractured skull and cerebral hemorrhaging. The doctors said that at the fetus stage it would have had a 75-96% chance of survival had it been born without those injuries. However, CA law did not consider an unborn infant a living person. The common law definition of murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with malice a forethought. Because the fetus was not considered a human being, Keeler could not be charged with murder. Charging him with murder would violate the principle of legality.

j.

y y

y y

What is fair notice? Fair notice is explicitly informing those who may be subject to a new statute of its terms and penalties. Due process requires fair notice of a new law. No one should be required to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes. Statutes must be clear and definite and in no way ambiguous. Everyone is entitled to be informed as to what the state commands or forbids (Keeler v. Superior Court). Due Process also requires that statutes be clear and definite (In Re Banks). Due Process also requires that laws do not afford law enforcement too much discretion and citizens too little notice (City of Chicago v. Morales).

Importance of Statutory Clarity y Due Process requires that statutes be clear and definite. Example: In Re Banks the peeping tom statute, if read literally, would cover many circumstances which legislation did not intend.

k.

Actus Reus
 Generally crimes must have an actus reus and a mens rea to be complete. Actus Reus: Physical or external aspect of a crime. It is usually composed of a conduct and a harmful result. Example: A brings out a gun, aims, and fires injuring B. All three acts are physical components of the crime assault with a deadly weapon. a. Must all crimes include a voluntary act? Yes, the MPC says a person is not guilty of an offense unless the wrongful conduct includes a voluntary act. An act is a willed movement. MPC 2.01 Voluntary Act (pg. 967) (1) A person is not guilty of an offense unless his liability is based on conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act of which he is physically capable. (2) Following are not voluntary acts: (a) Reflex or convulsion (ex: epileptic seizure); (b) Bodily movement completed while asleep or unconscious; (c) Conduct completed during a hypnotic state; (d) Bodily movements that are not the product of effort or determination of the actor. (3) One may not be liable for the commission of an offense based on an omission unaccompanied by action unless: (a) Omission is expressly made sufficient by the law defining the offense; (b) A duty to perform the omitted act is imposed by the law.  This bars liability for mere thoughts and involuntary conduct.  Voluntary incapacitation (drugs or alcohol) is not a defense according to Martin v. State. Martin v. State: a man was intoxicated in his home and forcibly carried out into the street where he

became loud and used profane language. The court held that defendant could not be convicted of drunkenness in public when he was involuntarily placed in public. This case lacks actus reus. b. How does the court deal with a conditioned response? y This is a pattern of action one learns from experience. Typically an automatic response is followed by a stimulus (ex: Pavlov s dog). y In order to satisfy the actus reus, the act must be willed. A conditioned response is not willed by automatic like breathing. y Incapacitating one s self is not a defense or considered a conditioned response if one willingly subjects themselves to mood altering drugs. Example State v. Utter: (WWII vet suffered PTSD and stabbed son while drunk) was found guilty because the jury should not speculate as to the triggering circumstance. Furthermore, the defendant willingly incapacitated himself with alcohol, but the jury has no way to determine his state of consciousness. c. How does the court punish the act of omission? y In order to charge one with manslaughter because of an omission, there must be a legal duty of care such as: husband to wife, parent to child, employer to employee (People v. Beardsley). y If there is a legal duty of care, but further action would be futile in the opinion of qualified medical personnel the defendant is not guilty (Barber v. Superior Court).

Mens Rea
Mens Rea: a guilty mind. This is a person s wrongful purpose or intent while voluntarily acting out a crime. The purpose of mens rea: y Society says that the punishment should be proportionate to the crime, and the degree of degree of wickedness one possesses during the commission of a crime is a way to gage punishment. If a person commits a crime with malice, it is possible that they will do it again.

Intent: One s conscious objective or purpose to accomplish a set goal with a desired outcome. y y Common law intent meant results the actor knows are virtually certain to occur from one s conduct. Intent can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances: offender s words or actions, weapon of choice, or force of the blow.

Transferred Intent Doctrine: the intent to cause harm to one individual, but accidently causing the harm to another; defendant is still culpable because the social harm has been done and defendant s conduct accomplished the same result only on a different target. Malicious: acting with evil intentions or with reckless disregard. Malice may be express or implied. y Actual intent to harm

Reckless disregard for property or life.

Specific intent: acting with a conscious object to achieve a specific result. A specific intent crime requires that the mental state of the perpetrator be expressly set in the crime s definition. The definition must also contain one of the three mens rea states. General intent: acting without a conscious objective, but acting in a way which results in a crime. General intent crimes require no specific mens rea. The state need only prove that the actus reus of the offense was committed with a moral blameworthy state of mind. This could sometimes be recklessness or negligence. Model Penal Code (MPC) Elements of Mens Rea Measurement of the degree of culpability One s conscious objective is to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and One is aware of the existence of such circumstances or believes or hopes they exist. One is aware that one s conduct is of the nature that it is. One is aware that it is practically certain that one s conduct will cause such result. A conscious disregard for the consequences of one s actions which pose an unjustifiable risk. A disregard which involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor s situation. When one should be aware that one s conduct will result in a substantial & unjustifiable risk. One s failure to perceive the situation involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor s situation.

Purposefully

1) 2) 1) 2) 1) 2)

knowingly Recklessly

negligently

1) 2)

Question: What is the difference between knowingly and purposefully? Answer: When one s conduct is done knowingly one has a conscious objective to perform. When one s conduct is purposefully one is aware of the scope of one s actions. y If a mens rea is used in a statute, the element(s) must be used throughout the entirety of the crime.

Ostrich instruction: A deliberate effort to avoid knowledge of or about a crime. This makes one just as guilty as actually having knowledge. This is the willful blindness of the high probability of a fact s existence.

Causation
y y The specified result of a crime must occur in order for the actor to be guilty. Defendant s conduct must be proved to be the cause-in-fact of the prohibited result.

Tests to determine cause-in-fact

But-For Test: the results of the prohibited act would not have occurred but for the defendant s conduct. Substantial Factor Test: Used when there is more than one defendant, acting independently of each other. This usually consists of separate acts crimes which alone would be sufficient to bring about the specified result. Example: Two defendants mortally strike a victim. The first strike killed the victim, but the second strike could have killed the victim had it come first. Both defendant s conduct were substantial factors in the result. Proximate Causation: a legal construct designed to prevent criminal liability from attaching when the result of a defendant s conduct is viewed as too remote or unnatural. y y y In order for a defendant s conduct to be regarded as a proximate cause, the harm must be a direct and natural result. The standard by which to gauge whether an intervening cause supersedes , and this severs the causal link is generally one of reasonable foreseeability. Question must be asked: was the intervening cause foreseeable based on the objective standard of reasonableness.

Intended consequence doctrine: (pg. 227)

Strict Liability
Strict liability: Offenses in which no mens rea is required, on the actus reus. These are usually crimes which do not require jail time, but do endanger the public welfare. y y y No strict liability crimes in the model penal code. If a MPC does not appear to have a culpability modifier use recklessness. In order for a strict liability statute to be constitutional all elements of the crime must be criminal.

Example: Bigamy Actus reus 1) marrying of another 2) while already being married. y The second element of bigamy is not illegal, therefore bigamy could not constitutionally be a strict liability crime. Public Welfare Offenses: Wrong-doings that inconvenience the prosperity of the public (virtually the same as strict liability). Attendant Circumstances: Facts surrounding an event, e.g. time, place. MPC 2.05 Culpability Requirements are Inapplicable to Violations y Offenses whose legislative purpose is to impose absolute liability (a.k.a. strict liability) do not require an element of culpability.

a. Are there limits on the legislative power to create strict liability crimes? Statutory rape: In most states this is a strict liability crime. In the MCP this crime still requires at least one element of culpability ex: negligence the perpetrator should have inquired on the victim s age. Doctrine of Mistake of Fact: Reasonable belief that one is not committing a crime due to circumstances. y y MPC generally allows for the defense ignorance or mistake of fact to negate the mens rea. Mistake must be actual and reasonable.

Example People v. Navarro: defendant carried away wood from a construction site that he thought was abandoned. D in good faith believed that he had the right to take the beams. Because D had no intent to commit theft he was found not guilty. Doctrine of Mistake of Law: Reasonable belief that one s conduct is not considered a crime. Example People v. Marrenero: a federal prison guard in CT brought his firearm into NYC believing that he fell under NY s peace law exception. MPC says that if defendant reasonably relied on old law then mistake of law can be used as a defense. However, NY law never did authorize D s conduct, therefore he is guilty. Entrapment by Estoppel: a defense which may be raised when an official states or interprets the law for the defendant incorrectly. This does not include lawyers because they are law predictors not law givers like legislator or judges. Question: how does the common law doctrine of mistake of fact differ from the Model Penal Code? Answer: [Navarro] Mistake of fact:
A. B. General intent offense: a mistake of fact will not be recognized as excuse unless it was based on reasonable grounds. Specific intent: Honest mistake of fact or law is defense when it negates a required mental element of the crime, even if mistaken belief is unreasonable. If D didnt know goods were stolen, even though circumstances would have led a prudent person to believe they were, he does not have required mental state.

MPC 2.04 - Different analysis than common law: A. Ignorance or mistake as to a matter of fact or law is a defense if: a. the ignorance/mistake negates the purpose, knowledge, belief, recklessness, or negligence required to establish a material element of the offense; or b. the law provides that the state of mind established by such ignorance or mistake constitutes a defense. B. Mistake of fact defense not available if D would be guilty of another offense had the situation been as he supposed.

b. Is ignorance of the law ever an excuse? Yes, when defendant reasonably has no knowledge that the statute exists. Notice must be given to allow for Due Process.

Murder
Murder (common law): the intentional killing of another human being with malice aforethought. y Many jurisdictions created degrees of murder to confine only certain murderers to the death penalty.

MPC 210.2 Murder: y y Criminal homicide committed knowingly or purposefully, or recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life; or Felony murder, causing the death of another during the commission of a felony.

a. Are some murders more serious than others? Legislator creates statutes and codes to punish those more severally who have upset the public s standard of reasonable care and decency more than crimes which are simply undesirable. ( stomachable the crime the severity of punishment.) y Difference between 1st and 2nd degree murder is premeditation. 1stDegree Murder: The unlawful killings of another human being with malice aforethought, premeditation, willingness, and intent to kill. 2nd Degree Murder: The unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought, but without premeditation, willingness, or intent to kill. Thomas Test: did the defendant know that there was a high probability that her conduct would result in another s death? Example People v. Knoller: Woman housed very large and aggressive dogs which mauled a neighbor, killing her. It was reasonable that the defendant knew that her dogs would result in serious bodily injury or death.

Premeditation/Deliberation
Premeditation: deliberate reflection with a view to make a choice, or to form a plan of unlawful act(s) in one s mind before the execution of such unlawful acts. y Both premeditation and deliberation are mental processes and can only be proved circumstantially.

Ways to prove premeditation circumstantially y y y y Victim Defendant s conduct and statement Threats and declarations made by the defendant Ill will or difficulties with the victim or other parties in the past.

y y y

Dealing lethal blows after the victim is rendered helpless Evidence that crime was done in a brutal manner Nature and number of wounds

Manslaughter
y Manslaughter must be completed under recklessness or extreme emotional or mental disturbance.

Three types of Manslaughter a. Voluntary: heat of passion doctrine or recklessly with disregard for human life/ b. Involuntary: During the commission of an unlawful act, not a felony, or a lawful act without due caution. c. Vehicular: Driving with or without gross negligence. Heat of Passion Doctrine: Certain provocations which society deems acceptable to make a reasonable person operate purely on emotion rather than reason. There must occur before there is adequate time for the passion to cool. This is considered voluntary manslaughter.

Felony Murder
y y MPC does not have felony murder. CA created the second degree felony murder rule: homicide which is the direct result of the commission of a felony inherently dangerous to human life (People v. Howard).

Merger Doctrine: (independent felony purpose) if the end result is to commit grievous bodily harm and the victim dies Proximate Causation Approach: A felon may be convicted of felony murder if the non-felon caused the death, only if the felon set into motion the acts which resulted in the victim s death. Agency Approach: Felony murder does not apply when an officer directly causes the death. y y Felonious activity must be independent from resulting homicide. Any act known to be dangerous to life and likely in itself to cause death done for the purpose of committing a felony which cased death, should be murder.

Death Penalty
1972- Furman v. Georgia abolished death penalty in U.S. because Supreme Court found sentencing procedure to be arbitrary and capricious. Juries should not have any discretion. 1976- Gregg v. Georgia reinstated death penalty in United States because a GA statute arose out of this case which prescribed guidelines for either judge or jury.

The Bifurcated System: The judge or jury must consider circumstances of the crime committed and the defendant s characteristics in a two part trial: 1) The defendant would be convicted of first degree murder in traditional trial then, 2) Further hearings would allow for judge or jury to hear aggravating or mitigating circumstances. Aggravating circumstances include: (1) prior record of violent felonies (2) killing occurred while in commission of another violent felony (3) knowingly creating great risk of death to more than one person in a public place (4) killing of a judicial officer, peace officer, DA (5) murder for hire or for monetary gain (6) killing was wantonly vile, horrible, inhumane

Rape
y Rape is a general intent crime.

Justifications
Justification: a deed deemed acceptable by society occurred, therefore defendant will not be punished because there was no social harm.

Excuses
Excuse: the acknowledgement of wrong-doing, but D should not be punished because of the circumstances. A social harm has occurred. Principles of Excuses 1. Causation theory: one should not be blamed for one s conduct if factors causing conduct are out of one s control. Downfalls y Determinism: everyone can claim outside factors caused their behaviors. 2. Character theory: Punishment should be proportionate to the wrong-doer s moral desert (absence of morals). Bad character is measured by wrongful conduct. Downfalls y 3. Free choice theory Example: insanity the insane person has committed a social harm, but they will not be held accountable.

Self Defense
Self Defense: the right to preserve one s person from immediate attack.

Common Law Elements of Self Defense y y y y y The attacker must initiate violence, Defender may only use force if escape is not possible, Applied force cannot be disproportionate, Once defender has reached a place of apparent safety he may not re-avail himself. If you are the initial attacker you must expressly withdraw your attack in order to legally use the self defense doctrine.

Necessity
y Traditionally the necessity defense is used during natural disasters, however not always.

MPC: defendant must have an honest belief that there is an immediate need to disobey laws (subjective). Common Law: Defendant have a reasonable belief that breaking a law due to immediate circumstances is the lesser of two evils (objective).

Insanity
MPC 4 Mental Disease or Defect 4.01: A person is not responsible for their criminal conduct if at the time such conduct is the result of mental disease or defect. Meaning the actor lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct, or has the ability to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. y Mental defect does not include abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or antisocial behavior.

Product Test: But for the mental illness defendant would not have done crime or wrongful conduct.

Duress
Common Law Elements of Duress:        Threat directed at the D or family member Continuous No opportunity to escape Imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm Credible threat- well grounded fear of death or serious bodily injury Had to reasonably believe that there was no way out D can t be at fault for creating the coercive situation

MPC Elements of Duress:  Can be a threat to D, family member or a third party  Continuous  A threat that a person of reasonable firmness could not have resisted  Does not have to be imminent or deadly  Present threat  No reasonable opportunity to escape the compulsion  A well grounded apprehension of death and serious bodily injury  Does not limit the Defense, allows it when you kill another  Cannot place oneself in the situation No Defense if:  If D recklessly or negligently place self in situation  Threat of property

Attempt
Merger rule: Defendant cannot be charged with attempt of target crime and of the completed target crime. y y y The primary function of this crime is to give police officers a legal basis to intervene before an individual can complete a crime, but also to prevent crimes, deter, and punish evil intent. Specific attempt crime. Attempts cause social harm because they are done recklessly or with malice aforethought.

Incomplete Attempt: actor takes some steps to carry out the crime, Complete Attempt: actor takes all steps to conduct the crime, but is unsuccessful (ex: D shoots and misses).

Solicitation Conspiracy Accomplice Liability

y y Typically the acts for an accomplice are attached to the primary party. To be guilty of assessor you must have the mens rea of the charged offense and the purpose to facilitate the crime.

Restorative Justice/ADR

Crimes
Common Law Breaking and entering into another s dwelling at night with the intent to commit a crime. Model Penal Code The entering of a building or occupied space, not open to the public, with the purpose to commit a crime. y 2nd degree if burglary committed in the dwelling of another at night & actor purposefully, knowingly, or recklessly inflicts bodily injury or is armed with explosives or a deadly weapon. y Otherwise it s 3rd degree Committing criminal homicide either: purposefully or knowingly; or recklessly with an indifference to the value of human life. (Also felony murder: when one is recklessly commits criminal homicide while committing or attempting to commit a felony.) Criminal homicide that is committed recklessly, but not during the commission of a felony; or when one is under extreme mental or emotional disturbance.

Burglary

Murder

The unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.

Manslaughter

The unlawful killing of another human being without malice.

Mayhem

Injury permanently impairing the victim s ability to defend one s self, or to severely annoy one s adversary. The unlawful removal of another from their home, place of business, or substantial distance from the vicinity where he is found; or unlawfully confining another for a substantial period in a place of isolation in order to: y hold for ransom or use as shield y complete a felony y Inflict bodily injury or terrorize victim y Interfere with gov. or political function. y Unlawful attempt to purposefully or knowingly commit a battery, y Attempts to cause or purposefully, knowingly, or recklessly causes

Kidnapping

Assault

y Clear, present ability to complete the battery.

conspiracy

bodily injury to another y Negligently causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon. y Attempt by physical menace to put another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury. (No proximity requirement) When one agrees with one or more people to: engage in a crime, attempt to engage in a crime, or solicitation to commit a crime, or agrees to aid another in the commission of a crime.

Solicitation Larceny

Rape

A trespasser who unlawfully takes away another s property without consent and with the intent to not to return it. Male forcibly having sexual intercourse with a female, who is not his wife, without her consent. Acting with the culpability of the target crime, one purposefully engages in conduct that would constitute the crime if the attendant circumstances were as one believes them to be, or Merged with attempt

Attempt

Battery

Aggravated Battery

Willful or angry unlawful application of force to another without consent. y Application of force can be direct or through mechanical force. y Also includes unwanted sexual advances. Committing a battery with intention or knowledge that one s actions will induce great bodily injury or permanent disability.

Defenses
Common Law Insanity Mistake Duress Model Penal Code

Duress is an affirmative defense when the actor engaged in conduct because one was coerced to do so by use or threat of force to him or another & a reasonable person would not have been able to resist. y Unavailable to actors who recklessly or negligently subject themselves

such situations. Impossibility necessity Self defense Nonexculpatory public policy defense

The defendant is not culpable because it is no longer in the public interest to convict. Ex: adultery in most jurisdictionss

Supreme Court Cases

1. Coker v. Georgia: death penalty for rape is unconstitutional because the 8th amendment is interpreted to mean the severity of the punishment must match the severity of the crime. 2. Ewing v. California: CA s 3 strikes you re out rule cannot apply to non-violent felony because of the 8th Amendment. 3. Graham v. Florida: because of the 8th Amendment it is unconstitutional to sentence a minor to life imprisonment for a non-homicide crime. 4. Kennedy v. Louisiana: because of the 8th Amendment it is unconstitutional to sentence a defendant to death for rape of a child. 5. Muscarello v. United States: Statutory ambiguity does not negate the principle of legality. The Supreme Court held that possessing a firearm in one s glove compartment falls within the scope of the phrase carries a firearm. 6. Flores-Figueroa v. United States: defendant presented his employer with fake IDs and social security numbers. Supreme Court held that a prosecutor must be able to show that a defendant knew that the identification he used actually belonged to another person in order to charge D with aggravated identity theft. This is because in order for a crime to be aggravated it must actually harm someone. 7. Staples v. United States: Defendant was charged with unlawful possession of an unregistered machine gun. D claimed that when he fired the firearm it was only semiautomatic. Holding stated that ignorance of the gun s true ability is a defense and 10 years for a strict liability crime is disproportionate. 8. Cheek v. United States: airline pilot refused to file federal income taxes because he believed the 16th Amendment stated federal taxes were unconstitutional. Court held that an honest, but unreasonable belief is not a defense and does not negate willfulness. 9. Furman v, Georgia (1972): Supreme Court held that sentencing procedure created a substantial risk that the death penalty would be handed out arbitrarily (judgment without restriction) or capriciously (tendency to change one s mind constantly). No objective approach for jury to give death penalty verdict. Abolished death penalty in U.S.

10. Gregg v. Georgia (1976): Out of this case a GA statute arose which gave sentencing authority to either judge or jury with adequate guidance. Reinstated death penalty in U.S. 11. McCleskey v. Kemp: black defendant kills white police officer. Jury recommended death penalty. Defendant uses the Baldus study to show that the death penalty was racially biased and thus in violation of the 8th and 14th Amendments. Baldus study showed that black men who kill white victims have the greatest likelihood of receiving the death penalty. Court held that it was too theoretical. 12. Payne v. Tennessee:

13. Woodson v. North Carolina Exam Prep y y y y y y y Given a list of Thompson statutes to construe. Know the United States Supreme court cases. For rape know the common law and MPC, not required to know the different state statutes. Don t tell the facts. Use the facts to support the law. Organize around legal issues. When analyzing a question go over the crimes as well as the defenses. You can use abbreviations and headings.