CRIM OUTLINE PROFESSOR FISSELL
There are two main theories of punishment: > Retributivism - One is deserving of punishment simply because they violated the law. No deference towards deterrence. "Wrongdoing merits punishment" > Utilitarianism - The theory that punishing someone will make others less likely to commit the crime. The theory is that crimes will occur less if people are aware of the punishments. Purposes of punishment: > Incapacitation - the idea that we need to get dangerous people off the streets. Peter Greenwood's selective incapacitation theory - with more freedoms, people have the ability to commit more crimes. The issue with incapacitation is that it doesn't take into account the crime rates within the prison population. Incapacitation does not reduce crime, it just redistributes it into the prison population. Actus Reus: a "bad act"with the causation of some harmful result. This is the conduct element. Unlawful intent coupled with an unexecuted act cannot constitute a crime. There's an evidentiary problem with punishing people's thoughts. (Proctor) The act requirement can be satisfied through both commission and omission:
Proctor v. State - example of commission: -"No intent, however felonious, unless coupled with some overt act. is criminal." Jones v. us - example of omission: : There are four situations in which a failure to act constitutes a breach of legal duty: *1. If the duty is imposed by statute - 2. When one holds a certain relationship to the other which imposes a duty of care *3. When one has assumed contractual duty * 4. Where one has voluntarily assumed the care of another and secluded them from getting help from others. Mens Rea: One's mental state at the time the crime was committed. Circumstance Element: Elements concerning things like the time of day requirements, items being sold, etc. Conduct Element: The thing the person is actually doing Result Element: The result that needs to occur
EX: INTENTIONALLY SELLING ALCOHOL AT JONES BEACH, RESULTING IN ONE'S DEATH
Actus Reus
Thought Crimes: > Cannot criminalize an intent without an Act (Proctor v. State) > Unexpressed thoughts don't hurt anyone, incapable of proof Overt act is a necessary element for criminal liability Vagueness: Specificity Principle aka Void For Vagueness aka Vagueness Doctrine > Chicago v. Morales - Void For Vagueness doctrine is a principle rooted in Due Process. One needs to have knowledge that the act they're performing is criminal. "Notice of the ordinary person is needed." If the law is too vague or too arbitrary, it becomes discriminatory in the sense that law enforcement is given too much discretion. > VFV Doctrine invalidates a criminal offense if (1)it fails to give a person of ordinary intellect notice that the conduct is criminal or (2) permits arbitrary or standardless law enforcement... (Morales) * Involuntary Conduct Crimes > People v. Newton - D boarded flight from Bahamas to Luxembourg with a concealed weapon and ammo. After a dispute, captain landed the plane in New York. D was arrested and charged under a NYPC stat