Foundations of Criminal Law

1
Foundations of Criminal Law

• Civil Law law regulating relationships between
  individuals involves property, contracts,
  business disputes.
• Substantive criminal law law defining acts
  subject to punishment punishments for those
  acts.
• Procedural criminal law defines rules governing
  how laws will be enforced.

2
Substantive Criminal Law

• Seven Principles of Criminal Law
• Legality act must be prohibited by law.
• Actus reus an act or omission by the accused.
• Causation causal relationship between act and
  harm suffered.
• Harm act must cause harm to some legally
  protected value.
• Inchoate offense - an act can be deemed criminal
  if it could do harm that the law seeks to prevent
  (attempt, conspiracy)

3
Substantive Criminal Law

• Concurrence the intent and act must be present
  at the same time.
• Mens rea commission/omission of act must be
  accompanied by guilty state of mind. (intent)
• Exception to this is strict liability offenses
• Punishment

4
Substantive Criminal Law

• Elements of a Crime
• Statutory Definitions of Crime
• Federal and state penal codes
• Malice aforethought
• Responsibility for Criminal Acts
• Mens rea crucial in establishing responsibility

5
Substantive Criminal Law

• Eight defenses based on lack of criminal intent
• Entrapment government agents induced the person
  to commit the offense.
• Self-defense in fear of immediate danger level
  of force cannot exceed reasonable persons
  perception of the threat.
• Necessity break the law in order to save
  themselves or prevent some greater harm.
• Duress coerced into committing the act.

6
Substantive Criminal Law

• Immaturity children under certain age are not
  held accountable.
• Mistake generally ignorance of law is no
  excuse, except in case of mistake of fact.
• Intoxication person tricked into consuming a
  substance knowing.

7
Substantive Criminal Law

• Insanity courts have used five tests
• o MNaughten Rule does not know right from
  wrong
• o Irresistible Impulse Test could not control
  his conduct
• o Durham Rule act caused by mental illness
• o Substantial Capacity Test lacks substantial
  capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of
  conduct or to control it
• o Present Federal Law lacks capacity to
  appreciate wrongfulness of conduct

8
Procedural Criminal Law

• Defines how the state must process cases
• Procedural due process protecting the rights of
  the accused
• U.S. Supreme Court has played a major role in
  defining procedural criminal law.

9
Bill of Rights

• Ten Amendments added to the Constitution in 1791
  outlining individual rights
• For quite some time the Bill of Rights applied
  only to those cases involving the federal
  government, and did not apply to state criminal
  cases
• Barron v. Baltimore (1833)

10
Bill of Rights

• Fourteenth Amendment and Due Process
• Ratified in 1868
• No State shalldeprive any person of life,
  liberty, or property without due process of law
  nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction
  the equal protection of the laws.
• Has had a profound impact on criminal justice
• Powell v. Alabama (1932) ruled that due process
  clause required courts to provide attorneys for
  poor defendants facing the death penalty.
• Basic standard of fundamental fairness

11
The Due Process Revolution

• Chief Justice Earl Warren of the U.S. Supreme
  Court led revolution that changed meaning and
  scope of constitutional rights.
• Process of incorporation extension of the due
  process clause of the 14th Amendment to make
  binding on state governments rights guaranteed in
  the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

12
The Due Process Revolution

• Warren court has received strong criticism
• Accused of rewriting constitutional law that gave
  too many legal protections to criminals
• Criticized for ignoring established precedents
  that defined rights in a limited fashion

13
The Fourth Amendment Protection Against
Unreasonable Searches and Seizures

• The right of the people to be secure in their
  persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
  unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
  violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
  probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
  and particularly describing the place to be
  searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

14
The Fourth Amendment Protection Against
Unreasonable Searches and Seizures

• Limits ability of police to search a person or
  property
• Limits ability of law enforcement to detain a
  person without justification
• Protects peoples privacy by barring
  unreasonable searches
• Supreme Court must define what is reasonable or
  unreasonable

15
The Fourth Amendment Protection Against
Unreasonable Searches and Seizures

• Weeks v. United States (1914) Court ruled the
  federal courts must exclude any evidence that was
  obtained through an improper search by federal
  law enforcement agents. (exclusionary rule)
• Mapp v. Ohio (1961) The Supreme Court expanded
  this rule to include searches by state and local
  law enforcement officers

16
The Fourth Amendment Protection Against
Unreasonable Searches and Seizures

• 4th Amendment rights narrowed during the chief
  justiceships of Warren Burger (1969-1986) and
  William Rehnquist (1986-present).
• United States v. Leon (1984) Court created a
  good faith exception to the exclusionary rule
• Limited its applicability and gave police greater
  flexibility to conduct searches without obtaining
  a search warrant

17
The Fifth Amendment Protection Against
Self-Incrimination and Double Jeopardy

• No person shall be held to answer for a capital
  or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a
  presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,nor
  shall any person be subject for the same offense
  to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb nor
  shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a
  witness against himself, nor be deprived of life,
  liberty, or property, without due process of law

18
The Fifth Amendment Protection Against
Self-Incrimination and Double Jeopardy

• Self-Incrimination
• This protection is consistent with assumption
  state must prove defendants guilt.
• Validity of confessions
• Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) attorney must be
  provided to suspects when they are taken into
  police custody.
• Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Confessions made by
  suspects who were not notified of their due
  process rights cannot be admitted into evidence.

19
The Fifth Amendment Protection Against
Self-Incrimination and Double Jeopardy

• Justices were not trying to limit police
  officers ability to investigate crimes.
• Confessions can be unreliable
• Exclusionary rule applicable to violations of 5th
  amendment as well as 4th amendment.
• Inevitable discovery rule Nix v. Williams

20
The Fifth Amendment Protection Against
Self-Incrimination and Double Jeopardy

• Double Jeopardy
• Subject to only one prosecution or punishment for
  that offense in the same jurisdiction.
• However, single criminal act may violate a
  federal and state law in this case can have two
  separate trials

21
The Sixth Amendment The Right to Counsel and a
Fair Trial

• In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall
  enjoy right to a speedy, public trial, by an
  impartial juryto be informed of nature and
  cause of accusation to be confronted with the
  witnesses against him to have compulsory process
  for obtaining witnesses in his favor and to have
  assistance of counsel for his defense.

22
The Sixth Amendment The Right to Counsel and a
Fair Trial

• Right to Counsel
• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) made this
  requirement binding on the states, not just the
  federal government
• Right to Speedy and Public Trial
• Public trial intended to protect accused from an
  arbitrary trial
• Speedy is vague, no specified time requirement
• Right to an Impartial Jury
• Jury pool should be made up of cross section of
  the community

23
The Eighth Amendment Protection Against
Excessive Bail, Excessive Fines, and Cruel and
Unusual Punishment

• Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
  excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
  punishment inflicted.
• Release on bail not all defendants are required
  to be released
• United States v. Salerno upheld provision of
  Bail Reform Act of 1984 that allows federal
  judges to detain without bail suspects who are
  considered dangerous to the public

24
The Eighth Amendment Protection Against
Excessive Bail, Excessive Fines, and Cruel and
Unusual Punishment

• Excessive Fines
• Austin v. United States (1993) Court ruled
  forfeiture of property related to a criminal case
  can be analyzed for possible violation of
  Excessive Fines Clause
• Cruel and Unusual Punishment

25
Constitutional Rights and Criminal Justice
Professionals

• Police, courts, corrections have had to develop
  policies and guidelines to inform criminal
  justice professionals about what they are and are
  not permitted to do while carrying out their job
  duties.
• Recognize need for protection, but feel
  frustrated
• Is there a proper balance between the protection
  of constitutional rights and the ability of
  criminal justice officials to punish