ANS: In practice, strict scrutiny means race-based classifications are never justified. According to the U. ANS: The two concerns are fair notice to citizens of what is criminal and the potential for discriminatory or arbitrary enforcement.
Human language can never be perfectly clear or cover all possible contingencies. ANS: The Constitution does not end with the spoken or written word. It includes expressive conduct that communicates ideas and feelings. Important Supreme Court cases about expressive speech include R. City of St. Paul , Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc.
Johnson Connecticut , Stanley v. Georgia , and Lawrence v. Texas ANS: The right to privacy cannot be found in specific language in the Constitution. The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to privacy emanates from six constitutional amendments: the First freedom of religion, speech, and association , the Third ban on quartering soldiers in private homes , Fourth protection against unreasonable searches and seizures , the Ninth the rights enumerated in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny other rights retained by the people , the Fifth and Fourteenth due process right to liberty.
ANS: The principle of proportionality has an ancient history and states that the punishment should fit the crime. The Supreme Court has applied the principle in several cases involving the death penalty: Coker v. Georgia , Atkins v. Virginia , and Roper v. Simmons It has also recently been addressed with regard to imprisonment in Ewing v. California ANS: The principle of legality means that 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.
The principle of legality is important to criminal law and punishment because retroactive criminal laws harm values important to a free society. Three important concepts: knowing what the law orders makes it possible for individuals to obey the law and avoid punishment; giving this opportunity to individual encourages human autonomy and dignity; and it maintains the rule of law rather than the rule of officials.
ANS: An ex post facto law does one of three things: it criminalizes an act that was not a crime when it was committed; increases 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. ANS: The U. Supreme Court has held that an increase in the penalty for a crime beyond the statutory maximum must be based on facts submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Booker struck down provisions in the U. ANS: Vague laws violate due process protection in the following ways. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U. Vague laws thus fail to give fair warning and allow arbitrary and discriminatory law enforcement. ANS: In Kennedy v. Louisiana the court held that imposing the death penalty in the case of a child rape where death of the child did not occur and was not intended is a violation of the Eight Amendment because it is disproportionate.
The Atkins v. Virginia case made executing anyone who proved the three elements in the American Association on Mental Retardation definition applied to them violated the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. In Roper v. Simmons the court held that it is a violation of the Eighth Amendment to execute anyone who was under the age of 18 when they committed their crime.
Joe lives in Washington State. Joe tested positive for HIV. Joe receives counseling regarding HIV infection and the risks regarding the potential for transmitting HIV to sexual partners. Joe has sex with a woman without using condoms. Ahmad stays outside while Stephanie goes inside to get her things. Tom sees Ahmad through the kitchen window and runs outside to confront him. Ahmad does not see Tom but turns to go back to his car with the knife in his hand.
Tom and Ahmad collide and Tom is injured by the knife. Amelia wishes her sister was dead. If her sister dies, Amelia will receive a great deal of money. As Amelia is driving she sees her sister walking down the street.
Amelia makes the decision to run her over with the car. She swerves off the road and runs her sister over and kills her. Terrance is showing Manuel his gun collection. Manuel has never before handled a gun.
He reluctantly takes a gun from Terrance and asks him if he is sure that the gun is unloaded. Terrance replies that he never puts ammunition in his guns except at the gun range where he goes to practice. Manuel points the gun out the window of the house and pulls the trigger.
The gun fires and a women walking by on the sidewalk is shot and killed. ANS: Mistake is a defense whenever the mistake prevents the formation of any fault-based mental attitude, namely purpose, knowledge, recklessness, or negligence. State On one side are those who say what the defendant did was wrong, but her mistake excused her; they call mistake a defense of excuse. Instead, mistakes raise a reasonable doubt that the required mental element for criminal conduct is present. Mistakes sometimes are called a failure-of-proof defense because defendants usually present some evidence that the mistake raises a reasonable doubt about the formation of a mental element required for criminal liability.
The first is purpose. Knowing means that the actor knew something was likely to happen or occur. Recklessness means that the person was aware of a serious risk but went ahead and took that risk anyway, even though an objectively reasonable person would not have taken that risk. Negligence means the actor did not conform to the external, objective standard of what a reasonable person would have known or done in the same circumstances. Purpose and knowing are subjective mental states. Reckless is both objective and subjective.
Negligence is a totally objective standard. ANS: There are a few crimes that do not have a mens rea element. They are called strict liability crimes. These crimes are controversial because they can punish persons who had no mental fault. A person could be punished for an accident.
On the other hand, it is argued that certain types of crimes involve important governmental interests and would be too difficult to enforce if a mens rea element was required. Strict liability crimes are always minor crimes that are rarely, if ever, punished by imprisonment.
ANS: If a crime has a harm or result element, the prosecution must prove that the defendant caused the harm beyond a reasonable doubt. Cause in fact is an empirical or factual issue. Proximate or legal cause involves the question of whether it is just to make the defendant responsible for a harm that occurred in an unusual fashion.
In general, if the intervening cause was normal and foreseeable, the defendant will not be relieved of liability for the harm. Some main points: General intent is used most commonly in the cases to mean the intent to commit the criminal act as defined in a statute.
ANS: Mens rea is required because it is fair and just to punish only people we can blame. First, whatever it means, mens rea is difficult to discover and then prove in court. Second, courts and legislatures have used so many vague and incomplete definitions of the mental element.
Fourth, a different mental attitude might apply to each of the elements of a crime. ANS: Experts disagree over the difference between motive and intent. Probably for this reason, they clarify the difference with an example: if a man murders his wife for her money—his intent was to kill; his motive was to get her money.
Greed, hate, and jealousy are always relevant to proving the intent to kill. Compassion may well affect discretionary decisions, such as police decisions to arrest, prosecutors to charge, and judges to sentence, say, mercy killers.
Motive is also important in some defenses. Finally, motive is sometimes an element of a crime itself. ANS: The principle of concurrence means that some mental fault has to trigger the criminal act in conduct crimes and the cause in result crimes.
All crimes, except strict liability offenses, are subject to the concurrence requirement. In practice, concurrence is an element in all crimes where the mental attitude was formed with purpose, knowledge, recklessness, or negligence.
Shafeah hates her sister Nazirah and plans to kill her by running over her with her Jeep Grand Cherokee. Coincidentally, just as Shafeah is headed toward Nazirah in her Cherokee, a complete stranger in an Audi TT appears out of nowhere and accidentally runs over and kills Nazirah.
Mistakes in this sense are sometimes called failure-of-proof defense because defendants usually present enough evidence to raise a reasonable doubt that the prosecution has proved that the defendant formed the mens rea required for criminal liability. Purpose is the mental attitude that a person acts purposely with respect to a material element of an offense when, if the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result.
A person acts knowingly with respect to a material element of an offense when: i. A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct.
Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Category: Criminal Law. Constitution were suspicious of a. Proportionality b. Obscenity d. The Fourth and Fifth Amendments b. The Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments c. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments d. The Ninth Amendment b. The Tenth Amendment c. The Thirteenth Amendment d. Arbitrary b. Confused c.
Reasonable d. The First Amendment b. The Fourth Amendment c. Related sponsored items. Showing Slide 1 of 3. Pre-owned Pre-owned Pre-owned. New New New. Seller Last one Last one Last one. Report item - opens in a new window or tab. Seller assumes all responsibility for this listing. Item specifics. Good: A book that has been read but is in good condition.
Very minimal damage to the cover including Read more about the condition Good: A book that has been read but is in good condition. Very minimal damage to the cover including scuff marks, but no holes or tears. The dust jacket for hard covers may not be included. Binding has minimal wear. The majority of pages are undamaged with minimal creasing or tearing, minimal pencil underlining of text, no highlighting of text, no writing in margins.
No missing pages. See all condition definitions opens in a new window or tab. Joel Samaha. Publication Name:. Criminal Law Ninth Edition. Publication Year:. Subject Area:. Criminal Law. Shipping and handling. The seller has not specified a shipping method to Germany. Contact the seller - opens in a new window or tab and request shipping to your location.
Shipping cost cannot be calculated. Please enter a valid ZIP Code. Shipping to: United States. No additional import charges at delivery! This item will be shipped through the Global Shipping Program and includes international tracking. Learn more - opens in a new window or tab. There are 1 items available. Please enter a number less than or equal to 1. Select a valid country.
Please enter 5 or 9 numbers for the ZIP Code. Handling time. Taxes may be applicable at checkout. Learn more. Return policy. Return policy details. Seller does not accept returns. Refer to eBay Return policy for more details. You are covered by the eBay Money Back Guarantee if you receive an item that is not as described in the listing.
Payment details.
0コメント