Introduction to Criminal Law

Textbook Chapter 1 Notes: ● A crime is wherever the law declares to be a criminal offense and punishes with a penalty. Usually condemned by community ● PENALTIES FOR ACTIONS THAT ARE CONSIDERED MALA IN SE OR MALA PROHIBITA ● Civil law is a branch that protects the individual rather than the public interest. The injury is primarily to you as an individual and there is relatively little harm to society. The highstand of proof in criminal cases reflects the face that a criminal conviction may result in loss of liberty and damage an individual's ties to the community / reputation ● Conviction of a crime requires a high standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt ● Responsibility for a civil wrong is established by standard of proof roughly at 51% certainty ● Civil liability is based on a preponderance of the evidence standard ● Criminal law primarily protects the interests of society and civil law protects the interests of the individual. The primary purpose or function of criminal law is to help maintain social order and stability ● The NY criminal code sets out the basic purposes of criminal law as follows: harm, warning, definition, seriousness, punishment, victims ● Criminal procedure is concerned with how the law is enforced, criminal law involved what law is enforced ● Criminal act → a crime involved an act or failure to act. You cannot be punished for bad thoughts. A criminal act is called actus reus ● Criminal intent → a crime requires criminal intent or mens rea. Criminal punishment is directed at individuals who intentionally, knowingly, recklessly or negligently harm other individuals or property ● Concurrence → the criminal act and criminal intent must coexist or accompany one another ● Causation → the defendants act must cause the harm required for criminal guilt, death in the case of homicide, and the burning of a home or other structure in the case of arson ● Responsibility → the required criminal act and criminal intent must be clearly stated in the statue ● Defenses → criminal guilt is not imposed on an individual who is able to demonstrate that his or her criminal act is justifies (ebenefits society) or excused (the individual suffered from a disability that prevented him or her from forming a criminal intent) ● Misdemeanors are crimes punishable by less than a year in prison ● Mala in se → inheritly evil → murder / rape / robbery / burglary / larceny / / arson ● Mala prohibita → wrong because they are prohibited by statute → concealed weapon / leaving the scene of an accident / disorderly conduct / tax evasion ● There are a number of sources of american criminal law. These include the common law, state, and federal criminal codes, the U.S. and state constitutions, international treaties, and judicial decisions. Some states continue to apply the common law in instances in which the state legislature has ot adopted a criminal statute ● The US has a system of dual sovereignty in which the state governments have provided the federal government with the authority to legislate various areas of criminal law \Laws must be drafted in clear and nondiscriminatory fashion and must not impose retroactive or cruel or unusual punishment. The federal and state governments possess the authority to enact criminal legislation only within their separate spheres of constitutional power Chapter 1 Video Lecture: The Nature, Purpose, and Function of Criminal Law ● CRIME is whatever the law declares to be a criminal offense and punishes with a penalty (sanction) ● The primary purpose or function of the criminal law is to help maintain social order stability and public safety ● States condemn a range of acts andor specific activities in their criminal codes (legislature) ● Laws must be clearly written, nondiscriminatory, and provide notice to citizens and to the police of the conduct that is prohibited ● Unique laws: ● Wyoming -- Ski impaired ● RI -- duals are illegal still ● PA -- delivery controlled substance ● TN -- drugs / pregnancy ● Cell phones -- law vary ● Vaping laws -- law vary ○ Alabama -- criminal engage bear fighting ● Mala in se → a crime that is inherently evil ● Mala prohibits -- a crime that is such because society has prohibited it by statute (prostitution, drug offendes, mercy killing, etc.) ○ Points to consider: ○ Justification behind law ○ Public morality ○ Public safety Categories of crime classification felony vs misdemeanor Felony: a serious crime punishable by death, or imprisonment for more than one year Misdemeanor: a more minor offense punishable by up to one year in jail Model penal code: ● Established in 1962 by a group of lawyers, judges, and scholars for the purpose of unifying criminal law across the states ● State legislatures in formulating the content of criminal codes have relied on code ● Roughly 37 states have adopted varying parts of the code (states that most closely follow the code are NK, NY, PA, and Oregon) ● Criminal law ○ A legal action brought by a prosecutor (State v Jones) ○ Standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt ○ Criminal conviction may result in a loss of liberty ○ Jail / probation ● Civil law: ○ A legal action for a civil wrong is brought by an individual rather than by a state prosecutor (Smith v Jones) ○ Civil burden proof -- preponderance of the evidence (or roughly 52 percent certainty) ○ Punishment -- damages $$ (monetary) Main sources of criminal law: ● Common law -- foundation of American criminal law (adopted from English via American colonies) … judges rely on precedent (similar cases) when making decisions in future cases ● Judicial decisions -- judges writes decision to explain criminal law ● Constitutional law -- restrictions on government conduct to protect citizens (i.e. 8th amendment “cruel and unusual punishment”, 5th amendment) ● Statutory law -- law written in state crimes codes Supreme court: ● Supreme court -- highest court ● Created pursuant to Article 3 - constitution ● 9 justices (appointed for life) ● Writ Certiorari -- justices agree to hear a case ○ Rule of 4 Case briefing: ● Case brief -- condensed, concise outline/summary of the court opinion ● More efficient to learn case law (rule of law) ● Standard format -- opinions have uniformly how they are written ○ Sample model brief: ○ Case name & year: Roper V. Simmons 543 US 551 (2005) ○ Facts: List parties & salient facts (summarize in your own words) ○ Issue: Q for the court → what the court is asked to decide ○ Hodling: rule of law → brief statement 2-3 sentences ○ Reasoning: why → analysis -- the most detailed part of a case brief and should be very explicit. Looking at the applicable constitutional law and/or the criminal code (statute) is critical to explain the reasoning Opinions of the court: ● Majority opinion rule of law ● Concurrence agree but arrived at the decision differently from the majority ● Dissent disagree and explain Chapter 2: Constitutional Limitations ● Defendant assaulted his wife. According to the statue 298.5 V.I.C Code ● Heightens 6 months misdemeanor, Felony (1 year) male on female crime p. 22 ● No reciprocal offense (women-man) ● Gender violation EPC The Constitutional Democracy ● System of government based on a constitution that limits the power of government ● Major constitutional constraints: ○ Bill of attainder ○ Ex post facto○ Void for vagueness ○ Equal protection and due process ○ 1st and 2nd amendment Article 1 Section 9&10 US constitution prohibit bill of attainder and ex post facto ● A bill of attainder is a legislative act that punishes an individual without the benefit of a trial (prohibited) ● The constitutional rules against ex post facto laws is based on the interests of providing notice of criminal conduct and protecting individuals against retroactive statutes (the statue had to be in place before we criminalize the action) ○ See Stogner v California (law authorized prosecution child abuse barred 3-year statue limitations) 19 years later Statutory Clarity and Vague Statutes ● Criminal statutes should be drafted in a clear and understandable fashion ● Clarity benefits both the public and law enforcement ● A statue that fails to meet this standard is unconstitutional on the grounds that it is void for vagueness ○ ○ ○ ○ (i.e. State v Stanko pg. 17) Rural highway Montana (Sec 16-8-303) Drive carefully/prudent speed, reasonable person Brand new red sports car Due process and equal protection ● No state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or deny any person equal protection of the law (5th amendment US constitution) ○ The equal protection clause prevents the government from creating classifications that unjustifiably disadvantage or discriminate against individuals (race, religion, sex, disability) ■ Love v Virginia (1967) struck laws banning interracial marriage ■ Obergefell v Hodges (2015) same sex marriage Freedom of speech ● The first amendment to the US constitution provides that “congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of the speech or of the press; or the right of the people peacefully to assemble …” ● Freedom of speech and expression ○ Important fundamental right ○ Ensures that there is a steady stream of innovative ideas ○ Opens political debate ○ Reform Speech that is not protected ● Categories of speech that may be regulated and are not subject to first amendment protection include ○ Fighting words (cause fight/breach peace) ○ Incitement to violent action (stir up a riot) ○ Obscenity -- The supreme court in Miller v California (p. 27) declared obscenity is offensive sexual material with no specific, artistic, social or political value … Justice Stewart “you know when you see it” ○ Texas v Johnson (flag burning/right expression) Second amendment ● To the constitution provides that “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed” ● District of columbia v Heller (2018) ○ The 2nd amendment projects the rights of individuals to possess firearms ○ States can regulate gun laws as they deem appropriate (charged DV, campus carry laws, mental illness … ) Gun Violence / Crime public health approach MURDER TO MERCY -- Cyntoia’s appeal process documentary Lady justice represents: Equality No bias Is justice blind Is there equality in justice Sword demonstrates power of the system Think about: ● How in the last 15 months has our legal landscape changed ● Are we comfortable with the power government has right now-- enforcing lockdowns and restrictions ● Individual liberties have been compromised during lock down -- school, office, no more than 10 people at gatherings ● Are we concerned from a CJ system that this will begin to deteriorate too many liberties as a society ● At some point does something become more criminalized = arrested for not wearing a mask, getting vaccine ● Will we start to criminalize conduct that was once not criminalized because of public health? ● Bio-terrorism ● Limiting freedom of speech / guns = that's problematic ● Mandating masks , vaccine (more probalam tic) ● States lifting ban = that's irresponsible , this is temporary , fair for people to get arrested ● Verdict: ○ This is great / we need to talk about it , other side: isn’t it interesting / isn’t easy for policy makers to say the problem is the CJ system, lack of justice ○ Where do we start with change if it’s the system’s fault (too big for policy makers to change) ○ Expectation of politicians to stand up and make opportunities happen Chapter 3: Punishment and Sentencing ● The eight amendment to the U.S constitution is the primary constitutional check on sentencing and punishment pp. 49 ● The Amendment states “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor “cruel and unusual punishment inflicted” Early Punishment -- Colonial times: ● Punishment was public. Whipped / head cut off Purposes of Punishment and Law (proportional) ● Retribution → offenders receive punishments comparable to the seriousness of the crime (eye for an eye) ● Deterrence → offenders are punished to deter future crime. Crime policy is driven by this approach ● Rehabilitation → done to reform and transform the offender with support (i.e. programs) ● Incapacitation → removes the offender from society to prevent further harm to society (incarceration/house arrest/curfew) … ● Restoration -- restorative justice → requires the offender to engage in some kind of restitution -- financial reimbursement of community service Approaches to sentencing: ● Determinate sentencing (definite) → legislatures allow judges little discretion, offender is to receive a specific sentence, 5 years (i.e. armed robbery), no parole ● Indeterminate sentences (indefinite) → judges set a minimum and maximum sentence with defined limits (5-10 range) parole ● Mandatory minimum sentences → legislature sets mandatory minimums for certain crimes regardless of mitigating factors (25-life), 3 strikes laws (repeat offenders/habitual) Approaches to sentencing multiply crimes: ● Consecutive sentences → when convicted of multiple offenses, the defendant serves the sentences one after the other (-) ● Concurrent sentences → when convicted of multiple offenses, the defendant serves the sentences at the same time (+) Sentencing and plea bargains: ● A plea bargain a negotiated agreement between defense and prosecuting attorneys -- must be approved by a judge to ensure that any sentence agreed upon is within the range established by the guidelines , ○ Reduce court overcrowding ○ Fewer cases -- prosecutors more effective ○ Incentive lighter sentence ○ Danger -- defendant feels compelled Sentencing options -- proportionality (punishment fit crime) ● Imprisonment: individuals sentenced to a year or less are generally sentenced to local jails. Sentences for longer periods are typically served in state or federal prisons ● Fines → state statutes usually provide for fines as an alternative to incarceration or in addition to incarceration ● Probation → probation involved community corrections sanction (report to a probation ofÏcer and adhere to certain required standards of personal conduct) ● House arrest and electric home monitor → only leave for school/work (medical emergency) ● Asset forfeiture → pursuant to a court order the fruits or instrumentalities of a crime may be seized by the government ● Death → thirty-four states and the federal government provide the death penalty for homicide. Other states provide life without parole Death penalty ● Methods → gas chamber, electrocution, hanging, firing squad ● 1977 First lethal injection law (humane) ● European manufacturers stopped making the drugs (creates issues) ● PA 3 executions (TX, VA, OK, FL) Key death penalty case law: ● Kennedy v. Louisiana -- DP for child rapist cruel and unusual (only death for murder) ● Bave v. Rees → Lethal injection not cruel and unusual (2008) ● Roper v. Simmons → no execution of juveniles ● Atkins v. Virginia → prohibit execution of mentally retarded (intellectual disability) ● Ford v. Wainwright → execution of insane (unconstitutional) Wrongful conviction: ● A person is convicted and punished for a crime they did not commit ○ Eyewitness misidentification ○ False confession (age, mental capacity) ○ Gov’t misconduct ○ Bad lawyering ○ Incentives (testify against another)\Science (i.e. arson case) Exam: February 17 Ex: if punishing people just to safeguard society -- more inclined to incarceration / house arrest / harsher punishment Essay Question: Critical Thinking Should the primary goal of punishment be to safeguard society or to assist the offender in turning their life around? The question of whether the primary goal of punishment should be to safeguard society or to assist the offender in turning their life around has become a political debate between people on the right and left political spectrum. Typically, republicans run on a law-and-order platform that entails being tough on crime to win elections; in turn, causing a surge in mass incarceration. In more recent years, and possibly under the Biden Harris administration, there has been a shift in priorities regarding prison populations. The benefit from a more progressive outlook on the criminal justice system could mean investing more money into education rather than prisons which could prevent many juveniles from getting in trouble with the law to begin with. While we want to believe that punishment prevents people from committing future crime, recidivism rates demonstrate otherwise. However, if we as a society turn our attention to assisting the offender with turning their life around, there is a good chance that they will not have to engage in illicit activities to make a living because no job will offer them employment. Additionally, we have to consider that most individuals that are incarcerated will return to our communities at some point. I feel as though we can agree that it is preferable to have a rehabilitated individual return to our society rather than someone who received nothing from their incarceration period other than punishment, including but not limited to physical and psychological torture from other inmates and correctional officers. While I do believe that some individuals are too far gone and should be kept incarcerated without the possibility of parole, the majority of inmates could make a good prospect of reform. Instead of keeping inmates unproductive for months and years at a time, they could be developing skills or earning a degree within the prison so that in the future they can positively contribute to society. \ Chapter 4: Actus Reus ● Actus Reus → is the criminal act (or failure) to act “omission” required for a crime to occur ○ Only voluntary acts are punished (product of conscious choice) ● Note- bad intent or thoughts alone are not enough Involuntary acts: Result in Harm Example A hits B, B dies a. A reflex, spasm or convulsion b. A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep c. Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion Epileptic seizure (people v. decina) D knew of medical condition and knew it could interfere w/ driving (killed 4 children)? Was this voluntary? Omissions to acts ● An omission is a failure to act or a “negative act” ● Without special responsibility, individuals do not have a legal obligation to assist bystanders ● American bystander rule -- not duty to act Exceptions ● Contractual duty → lifeguard, babysitter; Comm v Pestinikas pg. 86 ● Parent responsibility care child (report death, food, shelter, medical) ● Statute: physician report injury of child, PSU case “ failure to report child abuse” pg. 86 ● Placed individual in peril (Jones v State pg. 87) D raped V, she jumped water-D failed to assist Status offenses -- Robinson v California ● Issue before the court -- can you be arrested for being an addict (status) ● Facts of Robinson case -- police saw scar tissue (needle marks) ● Holding -- unconstitutional to punish status offenses (i.e. narcotic addict) Violation 8th Amendment Possession of contraband and crime -- preparatory offense ● All states make possession of certain objects a crime (carrying drugs, illegal weapon, instrument of crime) ● Actual possession -- contraband within the physical possession or immediate reach of the defendant (dominion and control) ● Constructive possession -- contraband outside the defendants physical control but within an area of which defendant exercises control such as in defendant’s home, apartment, car, office Fleeting possession and Joint Possession ● Fleeting -- permits innocent individual to “momentarily” posses an illegal object ● People v Mijares: D removed drugs friend on way to hospital (was later found in possession) pg. 92 ● Joint: number of individuals exercise control over contraband (drugs/home or car) ● Dawkins v State pg. 93 (drugs in gf bag in hotel room) D not guilty Chapter 5: Mens Rea, Concurrence, Causation What is mens rea: 1. Mens rea is criminal intent (guilty mind) 2. The appropriate punishment of an act depends to a large extent on whether the act was intentional, reckless, or accidental 3. Evidence: that helps us establish criminal intent is termed: direct or indirect evidence Culpability -- Model penal code 2.02 ● Minimum requirements of culpability (levels): ● (A) person is not guilty of an offense unless he or she acted purposely (highest level of culpability), knowingly, recklessly or negligently … with respect to each material element of the offense ○ Purposely → most serious category ■ Requires the action of the defendant to be intentional or deliberate ○ Knowingly → occurs when an individual is aware that circumstances exist or that a result is practically certain to follow from her conduct (drug cases are common) ■ Example: Raming cam into protestors “i didn’t intentionally kill those people, it was just a crowd” but you were aware that running into a crowd of people could harm them ■ Ex-- Guys gets on plane with bomb and his intention was to kill his ex wife and her boyfriend but also kills everyone else on plane ○ Recklessly -- very risky conduct ■ A conscious disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk ○ Negligently → behavior grossly deviates from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exhibit Cases -- examples: 1. Purposely -- State v Sanborn -- Sanborn Husband hits wife head with microwave, toaster oven, punches 4 times: Aggravated assault pg. 102 2. Knowingly: Drug courier claimed he did not know (unaware) he was carrying narcotics or receiving stolen property 3. Recklessly: Durkovitz v State: Lion trainer, 350 lb lion flea market (attacked small child) 4. Negligently: Tello v State: trailer unhitched. People v Stanfield pointed gun wife (she hit hand) discharged wife died Strict liability: ● An offense that does not require intent ● Only an act is required: ○ Statutory raoe ○ Traffic offenses ○ Food and drug laws ○ Selling tobacco to minors/ deal drugs school zone Steelman v State pg. 116. D was convicted of selling drugs w/in 1000 ft school zone (irrelevant he knew he was w/in 1000ft) holding strict liability offense Transferred intent -- primarily cases of homicide and battery ● An individual intends to cause harm to one person and injures another ● Hit A (miss hit B) B harmed ● Criminally liable for harm to B Concurrence (Act + Mental state) = causation (result) ● Q - Does Ds criminal act cause harm to victim or was their intervening act ○ Gap from criminal act resulting death ○ Common Law “year and day rule” ○ I.e. hypothetical stabbed -- die 6 years later of infection ● Q - foreseeability (break the chain of causation) Parties to crime: ● Principal in the first degree -- perpetrator of the crime ● Principal second degree -- robbery (lookouts, get away drivers, disables alarm …) ● Accessories before the fact -- purchase firearms, mask, plan a crime (not present) ● Accessories after the fact -- help escape, hide weapon or contraband ● Accomplice (during crime) vs accessories (following crime) Chapter 7: Attempt, Conspiracy, and Solicitation ● SAC -- Solicitation, Attempt, Conspiracy ● Preparatory crimes -- planning, purchasing materials, collaboration ● Q -- why do we punish these crimes so harshly? Criminal Attempt ● Criminal attempt defined -- need intent or purpose to commit a crime, substantial step toward the commission of a crime ● To illustrate substantial step -- purchase gun, ski mask, tools for a crime, conduct surveillance (see PA code 901) Conspiracy: ● Conspiracy defined -- entering into an agreement to commit a crime, (some states require) and an overt act in furtherance of the agreement ● Pinkerton rule -- individual is guilty for all acts committed by other conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy ● Renunciation (abandonment) -- defense after conspiring individual ends the success of the conspiracy Solicitation ● Solicitation -- is defined as commanding, hiring,, or encouraging another person to commit a crime (whether its completed or not) ● The crime is complete when the solicitor engages the individual to carry out the criminal act, whether the act is completed or not ● Husband hires hitman kill wife (when is crime complete) ● See PA code 902 (defense: renunciation) Questions regarding class notes: ○ For Speech that is not protected under the first amendment → what about high school / college students that make controversial, borderline racist comments on social media -- do universities or institutions really have the right to remove them if their remarks are arguably protected under the constitution ? ○ In the Robinson case, can needle marks even warrant probable cause? Can they just assume that they are needle marks and make an arrest even if they find no drugs on the defendant? ○ Last question, this is a little off topic, but Idk if you heard cash bail was eradicated in Illinois & Ik that's positive for the majority of defendants since they’re usually of low economic status and can’t afford getting out of jail like Kalief Brown for example but is not cash bail then what other alternatives do they have? Commonwealth vs. Doe ● Doe was charged w/ murder (cares uncle in Philadelphia) ● Uncle found April (emancipated, dirty, lived crawl space basement) ● Odd smell prompted police search ● Doe emptied uncle’s savings accounts, never filled meds, hardly fed him ● Doe claims his uncle was abusive. When the family inquired Doe said all was fine. ● Doe is charged under PA law 3rd degree murder Why are we going to argue why Pessiniskas case is different: ● The court charged and found the Pestinikases guilty of 3rd-degree murder based on the legal Pennsylvania statute 18 Pa.C.S 301 (a) and (b). More specifically, (a) or general rule states “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 able” ● In sum, the Pestinikas’ oral agreement to provide care for Joseph Kly and fill his medication along with the act of essentially stealing his money, and lying about his condition and whereabouts, influenced the court on deciding that the couple had more than a moral duty to act. -- indication that he needed to be cared for ● Abusive ● No legal obligation to act ● No intent -- to cover the act -- premeditated murder Research Paper: Drugs and the law Since we started war on drugs where we’re seeing policy shift Policy motivations -- financial, public health (decriminalize), enforcement ( could law enforcement not handle this -- so courts could focus on more serious felonies), civil liberties Why these laws have claimed Is this reform going to improve the welfare of our country (in conclusion -- to be determined) -opinion Module 8 Justifications (Affirmative Defenses) Prosecutors Burden: ● The American legal system is based on the presumption of innocence ○ Heavy burden establish guilt ○ Case-in-chief (prosecutor presents case) ○ A defendant may not be compelled to testify against himself/herself (various strategies why D does not take stand) ○ Alibi (somewhere else) notify prosecution ● Defendants may present an affirmative defense. D has to prove this defense with evidence ○ Justification: self-defense ○ Excuses: Insanity (mental defect) / infancy (too young) Self-defense: ● Self-defense is recognized as a defense in all 50 states (deadly vs. non deadly) ● Q- of fact for the jury ● Reasonable amount force use (proportional) ● Unlawful force used by aggressor ● Necessity (immediate harm) ○ Question of retreat varies ○ State v. Marshall (p. 200) grabbing hammer timing … after shot Use deadly force varies: ● Castle doctrine -- no duty to retreat in the home (stand your ground) ● Deadly force -- cannot be used to preserve property ● You may intervene to protect another but are not necessarily required to intervene Case law: Issues to consider ● Reasonable - size, gender, profession, age (case law is everywhere on this issue) ● Immediate -- State v Scheoder p. 206 “cell mate I will make sex slave” stabs in middle night -- danger legalizing preventative assaults” ● Battered wife (mitigate muder to manslaughter) Use of Force Law enforcement ● Fleeing felon rule: prior 1985 many state statutes stated “police can stop fleeing felon by any means necessary” ● Tennessee v Garner -- held when a law enforcement is pursuing a fleeting suspects, deadly force can be used to prevent escape if “the officer believes that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or public ”. Graham v Conner Non-deadly force ● Facts → police used for when V was suspected robbing a store, but was ill ● Holding → objectively reasonable standard Police body cameras: Pros → Transparency + accountability Con’s → first amendment right issues / they turn off their cameras / funds (outweighs negative) Strategy to reform drug laws -- burdening system -- Do you agree with severe punishment -- 110 years Fed prison → yes because it was in fact attempted mruder even though no one was harmed, he had the intention to blow up the whole plane -- mens rea Defense: insanity plea, mental illness, actus reus is not present because no one was harmed ● Defendants may present an affirmative defense. D has to prove this defense with evidence ○ Justification: self-defense (How do they go about proving mental state when you committed the act) ○ Excuses: Insanity (mental defect) / infancy (too young) ○ Insanity- American law generally recognizes that persons cannot be held responsible for their actions if they don’t have the mental capacity to understand the nature and consequences of their unlawful conduct. Began by M'Naghten Rule ○ Another way of looking at insanity plea: Durham Rule ○ The criminal act was caused by his mental illness ○ Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required ○ Must skepticism about this rule because the rule offered no useful definition of “mental disease or defect” ○ Psychological defect /DNA makeup that they can not control ○ Guilty but Mentally Ill- Individual may be held responsible for a criminal act, even though a degree of mental incompetence is present. Not being able to prove insanity while a degree of mental incompetence is present (such as 25 year old with 4 year old mental capacity) Hold up liquor store -- bb gun, assault weapons, ski mask, Charged with attempted robbery, conspiracy Discussion board post: Prompt: As we discussed use of force in Criminal Law (in particular) by police officers, training and transparency are paramount to adhere to the law by these public officials. For this assignment let's consider the pros and cons of police body cameras and the law. Some issues to discuss (this list is not exclusive- meaning other points can be discussed) for example, concerning the public- is this a “search” (considering the 4th amendment) and what about the public’s right to privacy; are the cameras on all the time; how is the material stored and used for trial; do all officers in the US currently wear a camera; what are the cost? With this new policy comes many arguments that need to be summarized and addressed. Answer: Police body cameras: ● Pros → Transparency + accountability (police brutality) ● Con’s → 4th amendment right issues / they turn off their cameras / funds (outweighs negative) ● For nearly two decades, law enforcement agencies have explored and implemented the use of body cameras as a tool to help hold officers accountable and make departments more transparent — a way to help rebuild trust with their communities and reduce citizen complaints. Video footage can also enable departments to collect evidence during investigations or better defend their actions during a particular encounter. ● could help document excessive use of force and its disproportionate effect on communities of color. ● Police in the United Kingdom began experimenting with body-worn cameras in 2005, after which American police showed a “slow growing interest” in them ● Another catalyst for widespread adoption of cameras came in 2014, after a white police officer killed Michael Brown, an 18-year-old Black man, in Ferguson, Missouri. Brown’s death came amid a string of other highly publicized police killings of Black people and gave rise to a national debate over policing practices. Amid that conversation, interest in body cameras for police “exploded,” ● Other police agencies have resisted body cameras because of the costs, according to BJS reports. The Police Executive Research Forum said in a 2018 report that the Dallas Police Department had deployed about 1,000 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● cameras to cover 30 percent of its ofÏcers. Purchase costs per camera were about $189, but maintenance and storage for the thousands of hours of video footage amounted to $789 per camera for one year. → take from military budget Lawrence of the Justice Policy Center said research indicates overall improvement in civilian satisfaction with officers who wear body cameras, “These results suggest that we should recalibrate our expectations of [body cameras’] ability to induce large-scale behavioral changes in policing,” the paper state One 2016 study found that 92.6 percent of prosecutors’ offices nationally in jurisdictions where police wear body cameras have used that footage as evidence in cases against private citizens, while just 8.3 percent have used it to prosecute police officers. Despite inconsistencies in their findings, researchers told the NewsHour that body cameras can still be an effective tool for police reform and transparency when used properly. One key challenge is specifying how police body cameras should be used, Chavis said police departments should establish clear criteria for when officers activate cameras, who has access to the video and how often the footage is reviewed. Camera footage may sit for weeks in some cases without review, Headley said. Police video provides an important opportunity for police departments to train their officers, Chavis and Lawrence said. Police leaders should regularly monitor video to get an understanding of how their officers operate in the field, Lawrence said. Video and audio analytic technology have the potential to help departments flag troubling behavior or language used by officers, he added. At the federal level, experts said lawmakers can establish clearer standards for agencies while also giving them space to determine how to best use body cameras for their communities. In class, we briefly discussed the implications of police body cameras. This accessory first started as an experiment in the United Kingdom in 2005 and became widely adopted by the American police force after the death of Michael Brown in 2014. Unfortunately, we are still witnessing questionable deaths of people of color occur at the hands of police officers. Research seems to support that police body cameras have generally improved civilian satisfaction with officers who wear body cameras, but there are inconsistencies in the findings. At the end of the day, I would argue that something is better than nothing. In other words, police body cameras can be an effective tool for police reform and allow room for transparency and accountability if they are used correctly. However, there is a lot of work to be done given that there are no clear standards for when officers activate cameras, who has access to the video, and how often the footage is reviewed. I have read about many cases where police officers simply turn their cameras off and are not reprimanded for that. A simple solution for this is up to lawmakers to establish standards for agencies and set up a department that regularly monitors video so that departments can have a better understanding of their officers’ behavior. Additionally, we still need to continue to hold officers accountable. In a 2016 study, they found that “92.6 percent of prosecutors’ offices nationally in jurisdictions where police wear body cameras have used that footage as evidence in cases against private citizens, while just 8.3 percent have used it to prosecute police officers.” While it would be great to believe that our officers are not participating in misconduct, the public is constantly being shown otherwise through different media platforms and that does not even account for actions that are not caught on film. Lastly, there are concerns that police body cameras are simply way too costly, especially for smaller departments, but the U.S. is spending approximately $934 billion dollars on its military budget; thus, the federal government has the funds, they just need to be reallocated better. Chapter 9: Excuses ● Mental illnesses & law: ○ Trans-instuitionalization (shift policies) ○ Significant #’s mentally-ill involved CJ system ● Excuse defense -- provides a defense (although defendant committed a criminal act he/she is not responsible criminality: (1) insanity (2) infancy ● The insanity defense: defendant must show insanity at trial by offering expert testimony to the fact ● When found not-guilty by reason of insanity, defendant is committed to a mental institution until the defendant no longer poses a danger to society Tests for insanity: ● M’Naghten Rule (28 states and Fed follow) pg. 249 ○ Defendant, at the time of the crime, suffered from such a defect of reason that defendant “did not know right from wrong” ○ Psychosis -- inability to discern reality and fantasy State v Crenshaw beat and stabbed 24x’s decapitated with axe drove remote area dispose body / cleaned hotel room? Guilty pg. 250 Diminished capacity: ● Is recognized 15 states ● Permits the admission of psychiatric testimony to establish that a defendant suffers from a mental disturbance that diminishes the defendant’s capacity to form the required criminal intent ● Psychiatric testimony -- mitigates (reduces) mens rea ● Ex: Wells- Gorshin Rule: D kills V (boss) Expert testimony paranoic schizophrenia Intoxication: ● Voluntary intoxication -- contemporary trend it is not a defense to a criminal act but may mitigate criminal intent (DUI) ● Involuntary intoxication is a defense to any and all criminal offenses (drugged, unforeseen side effects of drugs) New defenses: ● Abuse -- crime result from own victimization ○ Battered wife or child ● PMS -- suffered severe pain and distress drove them act violent (assaulted cop case) ● Postpartum psychosis -- women drop hormonal levels following childbirth (delusions, hallucinations, and violence) Andrea Yates ● Environmental -- adverse reactions to chemicals ● Cultural defense -- maine sexual assault case ● Affluenza defense -- irresponsibility due to family wealth (Ethan Couch) Duress: ● Common law -- excused from guilt because you committed a crime to avoid threat of imminent death or bodily harm ● Does not work for taking the life of another ● PA -- does not recognize this defense ● We will later discuss extortion (blackmail) Felony Pineapple case: ● Teens wiped pineapple on their hands -- high fived student with allergy ● Charges: aggravated assault reckless endangerment, and criminal conspiracy ● Attorney writes: “fourteen year old girls. I liken this to a prank and a prank does not rise to the level of intentionally hurting somebody where they can die”. ● Q -- criminalize this action? Infancy: ● Common law -- under 7 lacked criminal capacity. Today we have a separate system for children (juvenile justice system all states) ● In Re Gault (1967): A prank phone and juvenile law ○ Holding: due process rights for a youth Transfer Statutes: ● There is a growing trend for state statutes to permit the criminal prosecution of any juvenile as an adult who is charged with a serious offense (State v Kent) Pg 264 ● Offense ● Background ● Rehab ● Pg. 265 Brazille v State A: Introduction 1) Actus Reus- criminal act (voluntary act) 2) Criminal law punishes voluntary acts and does not penalize thoughts 3) Examples involuntary acts – (1) A reflex or convulsion (2) Bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep (3) Conduct during hypnosis resulting from hypnotic suggestion B: Status Offenses 1) Robinson v. California established that it is unjust to convict the defendant based on his status as a narcotic addict. C: Omissions 1) An omission is a failure to act or a “negative act” a) The law on occasion imposes a duty or obligation on individuals to act and punishes the failure to do so 2) The American Bystander Rules a) An individual is not legally required to assist a person who is in peril unless there is a legal duty to do so in the U.S. b) Why is there no legal duty to act “generally” in the United States? (1) Individuals intervening may be placed in jeopardy (2) Bystanders may misperceive a situation, unnecessarily interfere, and create needless complications (3) Criminal prosecutions for a failure to intervene would burden the criminal justice system 3) When do we have duty to act (Special Relationships) a) Status – The common law recognized that individuals possess an obligation to assist their child, spouse, or employee b) Contract – an obligation may be created by an agreement (i.e., lifeguard) c) Creation of Peril – An individual who intentionally or negligently places another in danger has a duty to rescue d) Statute – i.e., physician report abuse (mandatory reporter) D: All states make possession of certain objects a crime (carrying drugs, an illegal weapon, instrument of a crime) 1. Actual possession contraband within the physical possession or immediate reach of the defendant (dominion and control) 2. Constructive possession contraband outside the defendant’s physical control but within an area of which defendant exercises control, such as in defendant’s home, apartment, car, office … 3. Fleeting: Permits innocent individual to momentarily possess an illegal object 4. Joint: number of individuals exercise control over contraband (drugs/home or car) Chapter Five: Mens Rea, Concurrence, Causation A. Mens Rea 1. Mens rea- the mental component of criminal behavior (criminal intent) 2. The Model Penal Code Standard 2.02 4 mental states a. Purposely b. Knowingly c. Recklessly d. Negligently Purposely- the most serious category of criminal intent meaning the defendant acted “on purpose” or “deliberately” “intentional” Knowingly- When an individual is “aware” that circumstances exist, or a result is practically certain to follow from his or her conduct. Recklessly- Reckless individuals engage in obviously risky behavior that they know creates “a substantial and unjustifiable risk of harm” Negligently-Engaging in harmful and dangerous conduct while being unaware of a risk that a reasonable person would appreciate. Behavior grossly deviates from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exhibit B. Strict Liability- Crimes that do not require mens rea 1. An individual may be convicted based solely on the commission of a criminal act a. statutory rape b. traffic offenses c. food and drug laws d. selling Tabaco to minors e. selling drugs in school zone C. Transferred Intent – shoot A (accidentally kill B) still liable for murder – yes D. Concurrence (Act + Criminal Intent) = Causation (Q: lapse of time or break in chain events) 1.Lapse of time: A. Common Law -Year and a Day Rule (liable for death if occur a year and day from criminal act) B. Today with modern science – longer period- 10-15 years later liable for murder because death resulted from bullet wound 2. Intervening Act: For ex (A shot by B) A. Hypo 1 – A In the hospital dies infection week later? Is B liable ___________ B. Hypo 2 – A in the hospital poisoned by ex-girlfriend nurse? Is B liable _________ C. Q- Foreseeability (break in chain of causation or intervening act) Q- of fact for jury Chapter Seven: Attempt, Conspiracy, and Solicitation Preparatory Crimes A. Introduction- Three types of Inchoate crimes (Solicitation, Attempt, Conspiracy- SAC) 1. Attempt- Act or acts toward the commission of the crime, MPC “Substantial Step” A. Factual Impossibility- occurs when a criminal act is prevented because of an extraneous factor (steal wallet has no cash, pick pocket “empty pocket”). No defense to crime 2. Conspiracy- an agreement between two or more persons to commit a criminal act A. Overt Act- most states and federal statutes now require proof of an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy; an act by any party is attributed to every member of the conspiracy and serves as the basis for prosecution of all participants (Pinkerton Rule) 3. Solicitation- commanding, hiring, or encouraging another person to commit a crime and is a form of accomplice liability (final criminal act does not need to be committed) Chapter Eight: Justifications A. Background: The American legal system is based on the presumption of innocence-heavy burden to establish guilt (i) Case-in-chief (prosecutor presents case) (ii) A defendant may not be compelled to testify against himself/herself (iii) Alibi (somewhere else) notify prosecution of this defense B. Affirmative Defenses- defenses in which the defendant typically possesses the burden of production as well as the burden of persuasion (D proves defense) C. Self Defense- recognized as a justification defense in all 50 states (*Aggressor- initiates force) 1. Central Components of Self-Defense (RUN): Reasonable amount force used to prevent or end the attack Unlawful use force by aggressor Necessity- immediate *retreat laws vary D. Castle Doctrine provides that individuals inside the home are justified in “standing their ground” and need not retreat (note- cannot use deadly force to protect property) E. Defense of Others- generally same rules as defense of oneself F. Law Enforcement – Deadly Force Tennessee v. Garner: held when a law enforcement is pursuing a fleeing suspect, deadly force can be used to prevent escape if "the officer believes that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or public" Graham v. Connor: establish “reasonableness” standard pertaining to the use of force by law enforcement Chapter Nine: Excuses A. Excuses provide a defense- although the defendant committed a criminal act, he or she is not considered responsible- because of i.e., age (infancy) or insanity B. The Insanity Defense (typically defendants who plan to rely on this defense are required to provide notice to the prosecution; Defendants who rely on the insanity defense are subjected to psychological tests-offer expert testimony) 1. Tests for Insanity – i.e., M’Naghten- PA follows this test (does D know right/wrong)- *psychosis: inability to discern reality & fantasy (Brandon Wilson case) C. Diminished Capacity- Permits the admission of psychiatric testimony to establish that a defendant suffers from a mental disturbance that diminishes the defendant’s capacity to form the required criminal intent (i.e., murder reduced to manslaughter- take battered wife example). D. Intoxication 1. Voluntary Intoxication- is generally not considered a defense to criminal act 2. Involuntary Intoxication- defense to demonstrating mens rea -could not be formed (because adverse medication reaction, drugging…) E. New Defenses- not all of these defenses have worked, but challenge us to consider social and medical science when making decisions 1. Premenstrual Syndrome (PMS) – PMS has been invoked by defendants who contend that they suffered from severe pain and distress that drove them to act in a violent fashion. 2. Postpartum Psychosis – caused by a drop in the hormonal level following the birth of a child that can result in depression, suicide, delusions, hallucinations, and violence. 3. Environmental Defense- lawn care chemicals made him kill (note, did not work) 4. The Cultural Defense- Involves arguing that a foreign-born defendant was following his or her culture and was understandably unaware of the requirements of American law (pics of young child nude) 5. Affluenza – 20 years vs probation (D received probation based on parents coddling) 6. Abuse excuse – a legal defense in which defendants claim that the crimes which they are charged result from their own victimization and that they should not be held responsible F. Infancy Defense – Common Law – under 7 lacked criminal capacity (today varies by statute) 7. In Re Gault (1967) case held: all juveniles will be afforded the same due process rights as adults (i.e., right to an attorney, right to notice of charges, right against self-incrimination…) 8. 1990’s – growing trend to treat children as adults depending on the crime (transfer statutes). Chapter 10: Homicide Most serious crime: ● Why is homicide the most serious crime? ○ Only crime subject Death Penalty ○ Cocker v Georgia “Supreme court explained -- the death penalty will only be imposed for murder not rape (death is certain -life is over) …” ● Timing ○ Beginning of human life ○ The end of human life ● Mens Rea and Criminal Homicide Common Law Murder ● Common law murder was defined as the unlawful killing with malice aforethough (illwill or hatred) ● Today states distinguished degrees of murder (varies state tp state) ● 1794-PA first state separate grades for murder and manslaughter Types Criminal Homicide Murder -- all homicides neither excused or justified Manslaughter -- voluntary and involuntary (2 categories) See PA Statute 2501-2507 The Beginning of Human Life ● At common law, defendant was not liable for the life of an unborn child unless the child was “born alive” 12 states still follow ● Most states today hold a criminal liable for the life of an unborn child if the prosecution is able to prove that the fetus is viable (varies) ○ States vary; conception -- 24 weeks Roe v Wade: abort fetus (limits third trimester) The end of human life ● Common law -- year and a day rule ● Today -- there is really no time frame ● Most states have adopted a “brain dead” test for when life ends ○ State v Fierro ● Assisted Suicide -- Oregon death by dignity laws (1997), Washington (2008), Montana (2009) NM (2014). PA 2505: Felony Mens Rea and Criminal Homicide ● Degrees or grading of homicide based on criminal intent ● First-degree murder ○ Requires deliberation + premeditation ○ Carried out in a cool state of mind in furtherance of the design to kill ○ Split second -- WV court p. 302 Felony Murder ● ● ● ● Murder occurs course felony BARRK -- Burglary, Arson, Rape, Robbery, Kidnapping State v Stamp armed robbery 20 min later v dies heart attack See PA code 2502 Manslaughter (Voluntary vs Involuntary) ● Voluntary manslaughter is the killing of another human being committed in a sudden heat of passion in response to adequate provocation ○ Heat of passion (anger, rage, panic) ○ No cooling of the blood (don’t cool off) ○ Note -- can words = provocation State v Flory ○ Wife informed husband -- raped by father Involuntary manslaughter ● Results from an unintentional killing from an act that is negligent/reckless (PA 2504) ● Some states include vehicular manslaughter (grossly negligent operation of a vehicle) Corporate murder / liability ● Hold corporation liable for murder ? ○ Officials or managers liable for the act ○ Fine and / or incarceration (persons) ● Ex: Ford Motor Company (vehicle) gasoline tanks rear car (caused explosion) ● Ex: Texas city refinery explosion (BP exploded) 32 billions blaims ● Pharmaceutical companies -- who is liable ○ Opioid addiction (Purdue Pharma) ○ Fraud ○ Antitrust laws violation (regulation) Rape → crimes agaonst children or elders George Floyd case Defense: On a lot of drugs Officers goal was to restrain him and calm the situation Prosecutor -He died by suffocation / asphyxiation -- was determined by the autopsy in court Not trained to kneel on someone’s neck Commited intentional murder -- not premeditated OR RECKLESS / applying too much force -- can something that started off as being reckless be Wonder how they’re going to be charged Can’t they just throw the book at him New York ending qualified immunity Chapter 11 Assault and Battery ● At common law a battery is the application of force to another person (physical conduct) ● Assault (attempted battery / placing V) in apprehension or fear of imminent assault ● Today -- states find either aggravated assault or simple assault or aggravated simple battery or (aggravated / simple battery) ● Case law finding assault: offensive physical contact uninvited kiss, spitting, tossing object, etc. ● Degrees vary based on injury to victim or who the victim is (i.e. school teacher, police officer, minor …) Domestic assault / battery ● Assaults committed family member (enhanced People V Irvine) ● Why victims stay: shame, safety, depression, isolation, financial, religious ● PA Law -- observe physical injury to arrest ● Strangulation -- expand protection Rape ● At common law punishable by death. Vaginal intercourse (against her will) not her husband ● Moditifed: gender neutral, marital exception, today degrees rape or sexual assault ● Consent -- minors cannot consent (15-19) ● Prosecution: Comm V Berkowitz (1994) ○ Immediate complaint ○ Corroboration -- physical injury or witness ○ DNA -- critical ● Rape shield laws (prohibit evidence past sexual activity) False Imprisonment ● No common law crime ● False imprisonment is defined as the intentional and unlawful confinement or restraint of another person ● False imprisonment is a crime that punishes interference with the freedom and liberty of the individual ● Shue v State (get in car … not move) Kidnapping ● Kidnapping at common law was the forcible abduction pr stealing away of the a person from his or her own country and sending him into another country ● Kidnapping today is the unlawful and forcible seizure and moving of another without his or her consent (extent of movement) ● How much distance? Substantial period? Sex Trafficking Indsutry ● Human trafficking is the recruitment transportation, trasnferm harboring, or receipt of persons by improper means (such as force, abduction, fraud, or coercion) for an improper purpose including forced labor or seual exploitation ● Documentary Friday -- Selling the Girl next door ● Billion dollar industry / thousands victims (teens) ● Profile: target runaway, lack stability/support system (broken home) ● Perpetrator: criminal organizations and average male (challenging to apprehend) ● Goals: harbor (include isolation) confinement and monitor (control -- treats to safety / family) ● Soliciting -- offering value to service (sex/labor) ● Debt bondage -- remove financial control Chapter 12: Burglary, Trespass, Arson, and Mischief ● Burglary at common law was defined as the breaking and entering of the dwelling house of another at night with the intention to commit a felony ○ The nighttime requirement no longer exists ○ Breaking (states no longer require a breaking) ○ Dwelling of another (no longer limited to a home, apartment, office …) ○ Bruce v Commonwealth Trespass ● Criminal trespass is the unauthorized entry or remaining on the land or premises of another ● Criminal trespass entails an unauthorized entry, and unlike burglary, there is no requirement that the intruder intent to commit a felony ● Curtilage of a house or dwelling is the land immediately surrounding it ● Child v State (Florida case) Arson ● Common law arson is defined as the willful and malicious burning of the dwelling house of another ● Fire must not necessarily destroy or seriously damage the structure (may have mere charring) ● States no longer limit to dwelling place (i.e. office or business) ● MPC -- start fire or cause explosion … to any building, structure of another Criminal Mischief ● The common law offense of malicious mischief is defined as the destruction, or damage to the personal property (physical belongings) of another ● Criminal mischief includes damage to both personal and real (land and structures) ● Valuation -- based on sanction $$$ ● People v Stockwell Introduction ● The notion that the home is an individual’s castle is deeply integrated in the American character ● Common law offenses developed to protect an individual’s dwelling -- burglary, trespass, arson, malicious mischief Chapter 13: Crimes Against Property Introduction: ● Property crimes all involve the seizure of the property of another individual through either a wrongful taking, fraud (deceit) or force. ● Theft (larceny) ● Robbery ● Extortion ● Computer crime -- anything involving PC Larceny (theft) ● Common Law Larceny -- trespassory taking of another’s property with the intent to deprive ● Theft: Taking and carrying away of the personal property of another ○ Retail theft ○ Theft motor vehicle ○ Theft by deception ○ LOL -- Library theft (still on the books in PA) ○ Identity theft Robbery / extortion ● Theft from an individual with the use of violence and intimidation (theft + force) ● Property must be taken directly from the victim’s person or presence by means of violence of intimidation ● Aggravated robbery -- using weapon and inflicting serious bodily injury ● Extortion: the taking of property from another by present threat of future violence or threat to circulate secret, embarrassing, or harmful information Statute of limitations ● Statute prescribing a period for bringing a legal action (this includes claims made by the government). After time has elapsed-courts no longer have jurisdiction ● 2-5 YEARS FOR THEFT CLAIMS ● Murder no limit ○ Why? → memories fade, witnesses die/relocate, evidence is lost Computer crime ● Cyber-crime (e-crime, hi-tech crime) ● Unauthorized access to a computer, network, or program (hacker) ● Steal data, remove data, disable data or copy data ○ Fraud -- manipulating data (transferring funds, forgery) ○ Child pornography -- make/distribute ○ Cyberbullying -- harassing or stalking ○ Illegal sales -- selling illicit goods (drugs/guns) ○ Phishing -- deceive to gain private info Identity theft ● FTC reports 3.2 million people are victimized each year ○ Identity theft is estimated to occur every 10 seconds ● Theft of a person's name and identifying information, including: ○ Social security number ○ Bank account information ○ Credit card numbers ○ Low tech methods -- steal wallet, dumpster dive-- high tech involvement (computer crimes) Hypothetical: At common law rape was specifically vaginal intercourse against someone’s will with the exception of their husband Rape today is gender neutral and the maritial exception Most difficult crime to charge and prosecute -- a lot of time because missing evidence since people wait to come forward and becomes a he/said/she said -- pg 367: The defs and the victim had a very votial relationship and defendant was often -victim would have sex to accomdate wth defednat. Defendant showed up to her school and said to come home with her and she agreed to go with him so he wouldn’t make a scene. When he arrived he pushed her on the bed and “raped her” but she also didn’t try to push him off Discussion board: Topic Corporate liability -- look out for case Daulton (Dalkon) Shield Case (1970), also think about we have Purdue pharma case -- we have agents that make really bad decisions -pharmaceutical company that encouraged opioid use and told doctors they would pay them if they prescribe-- resulted in 400K people dying of opiod deaths in the past years -- 8Billion dollar fine, continue to get richer (couple that owns company) SHOULD IF A CORPORATION -- IF SOMETHING TRAGIC HAPPENS / FRAUD ETC. SHOULD WE BE DOING MORE THAN JUST YIELDING FINES / WITH WHAT WE KNOW NOW ABOUT EXECUTIVES THAT MISLEAD EVERYONE, SHOULD WE HOLD THEM LIABLE FOR ALL THE RESULTING DEATHS George Floyd case Defense: On a lot of drugs Officers goal was to restrain him and calm the situation Prosecutor -He died by suffocation / asphyxiation -- was determined by the autopsy in court Not trained to kneel on someone’s neck Commited intentional murder -- not premeditated OR RECKLESS / applying too much force -- can something that started off as being reckless transition into premeditation? Additional notes: The police should -- force beyond what's necessary to what you need to restrain a suspect , handcuffed, calling out that they don’t breathe Many experts have testified now that George Floyd died of “a low level of oxygen” that caused brain damage / another said he died of law enforcement subdual, restraint and compression Questions: ● Last week you gave the example if someone planned to rob a place and it went bad, maybe a murder resulted and there was a friend in the car waiting as a getaway driver, they would also be charged with murder (if i remember that correctly) so with that being said, the two offcers that were alongside Derek and didn’t intervene, would they also get his same penalty ?? ● Why can’t the prosecutor essentially throw the book at Derek, I assume its not possible to charge someone with premeditated murder and 2nd degree at the same time ?? ● New York City is moving to end qualified immunity. If that was happening in Minneapolis or Minnesota, how would the case be tried differently or in general what are the implications of ending qualified immunity? -- can be sued , cops are going to have to get insurance plans, do they make enough to cover those primus, are we willing to pay them more, no ones going to want to be a cop, non QUALIFIED people are going to enter the force ● Is past experience of an officer relevant / then why is it okay to bring up a defendants or victim’s criminal history Corporate murder / liability ● Hold corporation liable for murder ? ○ Officials or managers liable for the act ○ Fine and / or incarceration (persons) ● Ex: Ford Motor Company (vehicle) gasoline tanks rear car (caused explosion) ● Ex: Texas city refinery explosion (BP exploded) 32 billions blaims ● Pharmaceutical companies -- who is liable ○ Opioid addiction (Purdue Pharma) ○ Fraud ○ Antitrust laws violation (regulation) Discussion board: Official question: Does it make sense to hold a corporation criminally liable as well as individuals within the corporation (explain)? Also evaluate the opioid crisis reviewing and evaluating the Purdue Pharma case as it relates to this issue? Finally consider, should companies (or executives) be liable for the murders they have caused (if they committed fraud)? My notes: ● Ppl that higher up -- more power -- but that doesn't excuse lowe representations ● Topic Corporate liability -- look out for case Daulton (Dalkon) Shield Case (1970) & ● Purdue pharma case -- we have agents that make really bad decisions -- pharmaceutical company that encouraged opioid use and told doctors they would pay them if they prescribe-- resulted in 400K people dying of opioid deaths in the past years -- 8Billion dollar fine, continue to get richer (couple that owns company) ● SHOULD IF A CORPORATION -- IF SOMETHING TRAGIC HAPPENS / FRAUD ETC. SHOULD WE BE DOING MORE THAN JUST YIELDING FINES / WITH WHAT WE KNOW NOW ABOUT EXECUTIVES THAT MISLEAD EVERYONE, SHOULD WE HOLD THEM LIABLE FOR ALL THE RESULTING DEATHS ● Most opioid addiction has resulted from being prescribed Article notes: ● Landau voiced regret for the harm caused by OxyContin and again said he had done nothing wrong personally. ● According to Elson, the financial pain for losses, like these billion dollar opioid settlements, typically gets passed along instead to average Americans who own stock in these companies. ● Look; legal experts we talked to say these are really hard charges to prove. Federal regulators are leery of taking individuals to court. But this has made members of Congress furious. They say street drug dealers go to jail for crimes. The Sacklers, meanwhile, stand to remain as one of the wealthiest families in America. ● Now, Purdue wants the court to give the Sacklers immunity from lawsuits by states, cities and everyone they hurt in exchange for a “contribution” of $4.275 billion paid over 9 years: an amount that is too small and paid over so many years that the Sacklers will walk away richer than they are today. ● The law requires a bankrupt company to disclose information that creditors need to make an informed judgment before a plan is approved. But Purdue says it will show the evidence to the public after the Sacklers get immunity (bending the rules) ● The terms of the bankruptcy would help the company settle thousands of lawsuits, while ensuring the Sackler family, who own Purdue Pharma, will see no personal loss. ● pharmaceutical companies have no regard for the humans behind their profits. ● Under this latest settlement, the Sacklers give up ownership of the company and Purdue Pharma has promised to eventually pay roughly $8.3 billion in fines and penalties. If we consider the official definition of corporate liability according to LegalMatch, it states, “ A corporation can be held liable for the criminal acts of its employees as long as the employees are acting within the scope of employment and their conduct benefits the corporation. A corporation cannot be imprisoned or punished like individuals.” While a corporation should be held responsible for its actions and be subject to fines or even stripped of its assets if the situation calls for it, I would argue that the individuals within the corporation should also be held accountable. For example, in the case of the corporation Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, we are now aware of the extent of the company’s role in the opioid epidemic which has taken the lives of over 450,000 Americans since drug companies started making, distributing, and selling large quantities of said prescription painkiller. In recent years, the company has been faced with a tsunami of opioid-related lawsuits, and plead guilty to committing federal crimes linked to opioid sales including but not limited to: selling opioids to doctors who were diverting them for illegal uses, paid illegal kickbacks, mislead the DEA, secretly paid insurance companies thousands of dollars every time a patient became addicted or overdosed while using Oxycontin. Although the company itself is being held criminally liable and has filed for bankruptcy several times, the top executives keep getting rewarded. A prime example is the owner’s of Purdue Pharma, the Sackler family, who the Justice Department alleges played a hands-on role in the marketing strategy that boosted opioid sales in an unsafe and medically unnecessary manner, remain one of the wealthiest families in America today and have no criminal charges against them. This is evidently problematic because it is an insult to the survivors, advocates, families, nonprofits, cities, and states that have made countless sacrifices to respond to this crisis for decades. It does not make sense for the Justice Department to continue to protect the Sackler family when they are aware of their involvement in the opioid crisis yet prosecute street dealers harshly for a much smaller amount of opioid sales; this is very contradictory and it demonstrates the dual system available that benefits the wealthy. I acknowledge that federal charges may be hard to prove against the family since they can likely make evidence disappear, however, we can not continue to allow pharmaceutical companies to have no regard for the humans behind their profits. Chapter Ten: HomicideA: Introduction1) Homicide is considered the most serious criminal offense and is the only crime subject to the death penalty Cocker v. Georgia (holding SC explains why DP imposed only for murder not rape…further this is a violation of the 8th Amendment). 2) At common law, murder was defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought (ill-will or hatred), and all murders were treated equally regardless of intent B: Types of Criminal Homicide 1.) Justifiable homicide – includes self-defense, defense of others, and police use of deadly force 2.) Excusable Homicide – murder committed by individuals who are considered to be legally insane, by individuals with a diminished capacity, or by youth (infancy defense) C: Modern state statutes typically divide murder and manslaughter into categories 1) For example “First Degree Murder” - Prosecutor has the burden of establishing premeditation & deliberation (other grades of murder vary by state i.e., Second Degree Murder PA (Felony Murder) D: The Beginning of Human Life 1) common law “born alive” rule requirement 2) today viable fetus (varies depending on the state what is viable) PA from fertilization Roe v. Wade – abortion legalized (limits 3rd trimester) 3) E: The End of Human Life 1. Year and a Day Rule – a common law standard- that provides that an individual is criminally responsible only for a death that occurs within one year of his or her criminal act (today that has been extended depending on causation determined by coroner – cause of death Brady case shot 1981- died 2014…cause of death gunshot wound) 2. Today brain death test (cessation of the brain) 3. Assisted Suicide – today some states permissible (most jurisdictions the act is criminal and murder) F: Murder – unlawful killing of an individual 1.) First Degree Murder- Requires premeditation (a) Premeditation – act was thought out prior to commission (i) May be formed in the few seconds it takes to pull a trigger or deliver a fatal blow (b) Deliberation – intent to kill that is carried out in a cool state of mind 2. Felony Murder a. A murder that occurs during the commission of a felony regardless of state of mind i. a felon is responsible for all foreseeable deaths during the commission of a dangerous felony (BARRK) 3. Manslaughter a. Voluntary Manslaughter i. The killing of another human being committed in a sudden heat of passion in response to adequate provocation ii. Heat of Passion – commonly described as anger, but is sufficiently broad to include fear, jealousy, and panic b. Involuntary Manslaughter - Unintentional killing of another acting w/ negligence or extreme recklessness i. When an individual commits an act that creates a high degree of risk of human injury or death ii. Vehicular Manslaughter – killing of another that results from the grossly negligent operation of an automobile or from driving under the influence of intoxicants Chapter Eleven: Assault and Battery, Kidnapping, and False Imprisonment A. Introduction 1. Three categories of crimes against the person -Freedom from sexual violations -Protection against threat and infliction of bodily harm -Freedom of movement B. Assault and Battery 1.) Common Law- Battery is the application of force to another person and an assault may be committed by attempting to commit a battery (place in fear or apprehension) 2.) Modern Statutes have redefined CL Battery (for example PA Code SA and AA, domestic violence, strangulation) c. Aggravated Assault vs. Simple Assault i. Aggravated Assault: A felony generally based on factors – serious bodily injury; weapon used... ii. Simple Assault: less severe iii. Domestic Assault- assaults committed by family members/interpersonal relationship (partner) 3) Consent – sports (assume physical contact) so could be hit in the face while playing and not assault C. Rape – Common Law – forcible intercourse women against her will 1.) Today modified – gender neutral, marital exception, degrees sexual assault 2.) Research: Crime results in extreme trauma- and is underreported 3.) Overcome hurdles for prosecution: a. immediate complaint b. corroboration - evidence of physical injury or witness c. DNA- evidence critical note, rape shield laws- prohibit evidence of V’s past sexual conduct D. Kidnapping 1.) Under common law, kidnapping was the forcible abduction or stealing away of a person from his or her own country and sending him into another country. 2.) Modern Statutes a. Forcible movement of a person from one place to another. b. True kidnapping situations must have movement that is more than slight…reducing the defendant’s risk of detection, facilitating escape, or increasing the danger to the victim c. or substantial period of confinement (i.e., hide in basement for 3 weeks) E. False Imprisonment (punishes interference with freedom) 1. False Imprisonment is defined as the intentional and unlawful confinement or restraint of another person. Chapter Twelve: Burglary, Trespass, Arson, and Mischief A. Introduction -Burglary- breaking and entering into a dwelling or other structure -Trespass - an uninvited intrusion onto an individual’s property and dwelling -Arson – the burning of a dwelling or other structure -Malicious (Criminal) Mischief – the destruction of property or the home (damage) B. Burglary1. At Common Law - Breaking and entering of the dwelling house of another at night with the intention to commit a felony (punishable by death at common law) 2. Common law burglary requires a “breaking” to enter the home i. most statutes no longer require a breaking. Burglary is now defined as an unlawful or uninvited entry 3. Dwelling House- common law (dwelling house defined as a structure regularly used as a place to sleep) vs. State statutes today differ on definitions of dwelling house. Some provide specifics such as any house, room, shop, warehouse, etc. Others provide that burglary involves a building or occupied structure). Bottom line modern statutes expanded what can be burglarized 4. Nighttime- common law, Burglary must be committed at night vs. State statutes today no longer require that a burglary be committed at night C. Trespass- unauthorized entry or remaining on the land or premises of another without his or her permission 1. curtilage – land immediately surrounding the house or dwelling (this can count for trespass) D. Arson- common law (willful and malicious burning of the dwelling house of another) 1. Today statutes very similar - grading varies and if death results (i.e., death firefighter -felony murder charge). 2. damage to structure may be “mere charring” not total destruction of property E. Criminal Mischief 1. Common Law- destruction of, or damage to, the personal property (physical belongings) of another 2. Criminal Mischief- Modern statutes punishment based on the dollar amount of the damage to the property Chapter 13 Crimes Against Property F. Theft: Common Law (called larceny) - taking and carrying away of personal property of another with the intent to permanently deprive that individual of possession of the property 1. Modern Statutes – today the grading of theft is based on the value of property 2. Identity Theft- theft of persons name or identifying information G. Robbery 1. Theft + Force b. Aggravating factors of Robbery: use of dangerous or deadly weapon in the course of a robbery H. Extortion- The taking of property from another a. of a present threat of future violence or threat to circulate secret, embarrassing, or harmful information Misc. Statute Limitations: statute prescribing a period for bringing a legal action by the prosecutor Key Points (Overview from exam 1 & 2) A. Goals of Punishment – Relate to Criminal Law Retribution – punish (violation of law); Incapacitation – restrain (prevent crime during period of incarceration) Rehabilitation – improve behavior (improve behavior as citizen); Deterrence – prevent future crime B. Constitutional Restraints – Ex Post Facto- cannot criminally prosecute act that was innocent while committed 8th Amendment (Cruel & Unusual Prohibited- Proportionality) Equal Protection of the Law – Prevents gov’t creating classifications that would discriminate (evolving) C. Actus Reus (Voluntary Act or Omission to Act) & Mens Rea (mental state) Strict Liability- no mens rea (just physical act) D. Why does criminal law punish individuals who fail to complete or attempt crimes? -Society’s interest security can be harmed even without physical injury; encourages prevention and intervention deters individuals from planning crimes E. Inchoate Crimes (SAC) F. Self-Defense – G. Mens Rea – Purposely, Knowingly, Recklessly, Negligently (Model Penal Code 2.02) F. Supreme Court Shaping Juvenile Justice Policy Evolving Standards of Decency (8th Amendment). These cases demonstrate we must treat youth different than adults and there are scientific reasons why: 1. Roper v. Simmons (2005) – no DP for youth (age matters/diminished culpability for youth) Court noted: youth are immature (brain science), vulnerable to peer influence and may have dysfunctional family they cannot extricate themselves from, chance for rehabilitation…) 2. Juvenile Court Procedures & Due Process Philosophy for youth involved CJ system “treatment and rehabilitation” In Re Gault (1967) juveniles same Due Process Rights as adults 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Theft Abduction Ag assault / Robbery Aggravated assault / first-degree murder / robbery Burglary / trespassing