The legal term abandonment has many different uses. In law, abandonment is the renunciation or relinquishment of a privilege, right, possession, claim, or interest, usually with the intent of never reasserting or resuming it again. This intentional action can take the form of discontinuance or a waiver. One type of abandonment is child abandonment, which is the practice of giving up or relinquishing claims and interests over an individual’s offspring with the intention of never reasserting or resuming them. Causes of child abandonment include many different cultural and social factors or mental illness.

One of the largest causes of child abandonment is poverty, particularly in cultures or societies with low quality social welfare systems where individuals are not financially capable of being financially responsible for child. Political conditions, such as difficult adoption proceedings or lack of proper institutions, can also contribute to child abandonment. Cultures or societies with liberal adoption laws and stable social structures often have lower child abandonment rates.

Child abandonment is categorized broadly to describe many different actions. Specific examples can vary, but some common actions that can result child abandonment include the following:

• Only minimally communicating and supporting a child

• Failing to maintain regular visitation with a child for at least a six month period

• Leaving an infant in a dumpster, trashcan, the side of the road, or a doorstep

• Not responding to a notice of child protective proceedings

• Unwillingness to provide support, supervision, or care for the child

• Not participating in a plan or program designed for parent/guardian reuniting with a child

• Leaving a child with another individual without meaningful communication for a three month period and without leaving proper provisions for support

• Absence from home for a time period that can create substantial risk of harm to a child

Child abandonment laws differ on a state to state basis. Some states include child abandonment statutes in relation to the state’s child abuse while other states have specific laws that explicitly discuss child abandonment.

Most states consider child abandonment to be a felony, and can include situations where a guardian or parent physically abandons a child with the sole intent of giving up all rights and responsibilities of taking care of the child. Other states consider the act of child abandonment as a misdemeanor with smaller penalties and include situations of non-physical acts of abandonment.

In a criminal setting, the act of child abandonment can be defined as both the physical abandonment of a child, but can also include the emotional abandonment of a child by failing to provide the child with any necessary needs. For example, certain states consider it an act of child abandonment if a parent or guardian does not provide the necessary food, clothing, medical care, and shelter for a child. However, some other states will only penalize a parent or guardian for child abandonment only if the parent has the intention of abandoning a child.

A judgment is the formal decision made by a judge or court after a lawsuit. At the same time the court make a judgment, they also may make a variety of court orders, such as giving a solution or remedy for a plaintiff in a civil matter, or imposing a sentence upon a defendant who is guilty in a criminal matter. A judgment states what party wins a case and what remedies they are rewarded, such as money damages or injunctive relief. A judgment also indicates the end of the court’s jurisdiction. 

Under the rules of civil procedure which govern practice in most state courts and federal courts in the United States, the entry of judgment is the last and final order entered by the court, leaving no additional action to be taken with respect to the issues argued by both parties to the lawsuit by the court. With only specific exceptions, final judgment is the only judgment subject to an appeal. 

A judgment from a court must be in writing and must show clearly that all the relevant issues have been discussed. It must also specifically the for and against parties, and any monetary judgments must be definite, explained with details, and expressed in words instead of numbers or figures. Any judgments regarding real property must also contain explicit descriptions of the realty in question.

After court makes a judgment, it has to be dated and docketed with the administrator’s office of the court.  A court can amend its judgment in order to fix ambiguities or inaccuracies that may cause misunderstanding, such as erroneous inclusions, or omissions. However, new parties cannot be added into the lawsuit through an amended judgment. According to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a judgment can be amended by a motion served within 10 days after the judgment is first entered. 

Different types of judgments are given depending process the court uses to make the final decision. There are different types of judgments:

Consent decree: A binding, final judicial judgment or decree which memorializes a voluntary agreement made between parties to a suit in return for the end of civil litigation or the withdrawal of a criminal charge or an end to a civil litigation. Typically, the defendant has already ceased conduct or agrees to cease the activity alleged by the plaintiff. A consent judgment also can memorialize the payment of damages. Consent judgments are most commonly used in family and criminal law, but can also be used in antitrust law. 

Declaratory judgment: A judgment in a civil case that declares the duties, obligations, or rights of at least one party in a dispute. This judgment is legally binding, but does not order a party of to complete any. A declaratory judgment is usually distinguished from an advisory opinion since the latter does not resolve a controversy or actual case. A court can issue a declaratory judgment by itself or with some other form of relief. 

Default judgment: A binding judgment in favor of one party based on a failure to take action by the opposing party. Typically, it in favor of a plaintiff if the defendant has not acknowledged or responded to a summons or has not appeared before a court of law. The failure to take action in court is the default. The judgment is the relief asked for in the in the party’s original petition, so initial pleadings tend to be extremely exaggerated.

Summary judgment: A determination made by the court without a full trial. In the United States, a summary judgment can be awarded before a trial by the court, effectively stating that a trial is unnecessary. This is often the result of a court finding that there are no disputes between the parties about the material facts and when looking at these facts, one party is clearly entitled to receive the judgment in their favor.

Vacated judgment: A judgment that makes a previous legal judgment void. This judgment is typically an appellate court’s judgment which reverses, sets aside, or overturns the lower court’s judgment.

In law, house arrest is a measure by which an individual is confined to his or her residence by the authorities. House arrest is also sometimes called electronic monitoring, home confinement or home detention. When an individual is under house arrest, travel is usually severely restricted, if not completely forbidden. House arrest is usually used as a lenient prison time or juvenile-detention or prison time.

House arrest allows for an alternative to imprisonment and works to reduce re-offending while also trying to cut costs regarding growing prison numbers and rising costs. House arrest allows eligible offenders to keep or look for employment, maintain relationships and responsibilities with family, and attend programs designed for rehabilitation that contribute towards fixing the causes of the individuals offenses.

Many of these offenders have to wear an electronic sensor placed on the ankle, or an ankle bracelet. If the offender goes outside an allotted perimeter, the sensor alerts the ankle bracelet monitoring company about the activity of the bracelet. The company will then call the residence of the individual to check for any possible malfunction, or if the individual has left the perimeter. If the latter is the case, law enforcement and the authorities are notified in order to apprehend the person. It is also illegal to try to remove the ankle bracelet.

The terms of house arrest can vary, but offenders are very rarely confined to their residence for the entire day. Most house arrest programs allow offenders who are employed to continue work, and only confine themselves at home during non-working hours. These offenders are also often allowed to leave their residences for predetermined, specific purposes, such as visits to a police station or probation officer, religious reasons, or medical appointments.

Often, these programs allow the convict to leave the home during pre-approved regular times in order to take care of general household errands like laundry and food shopping. Offenders can also be responsible for maintaining communications with a higher authority to ensure that they are in fact following the terms of their house arrest. Exceptions are usually made to allow outside visitors to visit.

There are many types of house arrest, all which vary in severity depending on the requirements of the court order. For example, a court can set a curfew to restrict an offender from leaving their residences at certain times, such as hours of darkness. House arrest sometimes requires an offender to stay at home for most hours, excluding the predetermined exceptions. In the most severe cases of house arrest, the offender is under home incarceration, meaning an officer would constrain the offender to the residence at all time, aside from the times set for medical appointment sand court-sanctioned treatment programs. 

While house arrest can be used for common criminal cases when prison is not an appropriate measure, the term is more often used to refer to house confinement as a way of repression by an authoritarian government against a political dissident. In this situation the person under house arrest usually does not have any access to a means of communication. If communication is allowed electronically, conversations are typically monitored.

Understand the Rights of the Accused

The Rights of the Accused is a group of political and civil rights that applies to an individual who is accused of a crime. The Rights of the Accused start when he or she is first arrested and charged to when the individual is either acquitted or convicted. The Rights of the accused are usually based on the idea of “innocent until proven guilty” and are a part of due process.

In the United States, the Rights of the Accused are guaranteed in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. More specifically, these rights are seen in the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments. When a person is arrested and charged with a crime, the individual is guaranteed rights aimed at insuring that the proceedings which follow are fair.

The Writ of Habeas Corpus

In all criminal cases, the burden of proof to prove a case is on the government to justify an arrest and detention of a criminal suspect. Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution guarantees the opportunity of a writ of habeas corpus. This is a directive from a court that requires the government to justify the citizen’s imprisonment. Because this guarantee, the person cannot be held for more than a limited period of time without being charged formerly with a crime.

Trial by Jury

One of the most important rights in the Rights of the Accused of a person formally charged with a crime is the right to a trial by jury. This right of the accused is guaranteed in Article III of the United States Constitution as well as the Sixth Amendment. A person who is accused of a crime has the right to have their innocence or guilt determined by a panel made up of fellow-citizens. In a federal case, formal charges against the individual cannot even be filed unless a grand jury has first convened and issued an indictment against the person. Both the jury trial and grand jury are there to protect private citizens from police officers who are overzealous, or from judges and prosecutors. By interjecting the judgment and wisdom of other private citizens into the legal process, an effective check is created on the law enforcement and on the judicial system involved. While jury trials are a guaranteed right by the Constitution, there are many instances where trial can be conducted without a jury, such as an individual waiving his or her right to a jury trial.

Self-Incrimination

The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution states that no individual shall be forced in a criminal case to be a witness against himself in the case. However, this does not mean that they can avoid testifying just to avoid embarrassment or a conviction. Instead, they must have a valid concern that a testimony will contribute to a conviction. Individuals accused of crimes as well as witnesses involved in legal proceedings will often use this right by claiming their Fifth Amendment rights or pleading the fifth.

Out of the different Rights of the Accused, this one is extremely fundamental to the system of constitutional rule. In many situations, an investigator or prosecutor will listen to an individual in exchange for immunity rather than trying to prosecute them based on a testimony. Prosecutors often grant immunity to individuals suspected of committing lesser crimes if the person’s testimony can help convict a more notable suspect of an even more serious crime.

Double Jeopardy

Under the Rights of the Accused, an individual accused of a crime is also protected from double jeopardy. This comes from the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution which states that no individual shall put on trial or charged for the same offense twice. For example, if the result of a trial by jury is an acquittal, no further legal action can be taken against the defendant for that specific crime. The exception to this occurs when a defendant challenges the guilty conviction and is then granted a new trial, but this is usually only granted if there was a procedural error in the first trial.

Another exception to the double jeopardy rule is that it is possible for an individual to be tried in criminal court for a certain crime and then be later sued in civil court for the damages caused by the same criminal act in question. The rules and laws that are applicable to the two legal systems are different enough that they are considered distinct in regards to the Fifth Amendment. Furthermore, an individual can also be tried for different crimes that were committed in the course of a specific action or set of actions. Because they are legally defined as separate crimes, a second trial would not go against the double jeopardy provision of the Rights of the Accused.

No Cruel or Unusual or Excess Punishments or Fines

Under the Eighth Amendment, the government is forbidden from imposing excessive fines, bail, or punishments which are “cruel and unusual”. Under the limitations created by the Constitution, punishments for crimes can include fines or incarceration, but cannot include physically harmful or excessively painful penalties like whippings or branding. The Supreme Court has also interpreted the Eighth Amendment to forbid imprisonment in inhumane or unsanitary conditions.

One of the most important and necessary standards the Supreme Court has created and applied in determining if a fine or punishment violates the Eighth Amendment is by using a test of proportionality. The Supreme Court has ruled that depending on the circumstances, the death penalty can be thought of as cruel and unusual punishment, but only in circumstances death not proportionate to the crime in question.

Search Warrants

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution forbids the search or seizure of the private property of an individual without a warrant. This means that a government agent or police officer cannot simply enter a home in order to search it or seize evidence unless the proper authority of a judge has been received. When law enforcement is investigating a crime, the person must assemble enough substantial evidence to fully convince a judge that the violation of a person’s privacy and property is necessary and warranted. The standard for showing the need for a warrant is called probable cause.

What are the rights of victims?

Those that have been victimized are often scared and unsure of what to do next.  It is very important to remain calm, contact the authorities and do nothing that will compromise evidence that will find and convict the criminal.  Timing is essential in a criminal case and you must not delay in reporting the crime.  The police will have professionals, most likely a detective that will be able to help you organize your thoughts and build a case.  Cooperate with law enforcement and be truthful in your testimony at all times to avoid compromising the case.  Do not fabricate or mislead the detectives as this will prevent them from giving your case proper credence.

What do I do immediately after a crime?

Obviously, this varies on the nature of the crime.  In almost all cases, however, there will be a crime scene.  You will need to preserve the crime scene by not touching any items, however important.  Just a tiny sliver of DNA can be all that is needed to find a culprit.  The need to preserve a crime scene applies, unfortunately, in rape and sexual assault cases and it is imperative that the victim not wash or clean after the attack.  The police will get you to a hospital where the DNA will be collected and you will then be given the treatment you need for damage sustained, be it physical or emotional trauma.

Do not hesitate in calling the police after a crime.  You may need to use a payphone, or the phone of a nearby merchant or passerby.  Either way, the quicker the police get to the crime scene, the better the chance that the police will preserve evidence and even look for the suspect in the event that the suspect remains in the area.

What do I do if I am called to testify?

You must be truthful about the circumstances of the crime and recount the events of the crime to the court.  You must answer questions posed to you, and you will be assisted, usually be an attorney if you choose to testify.  You may alternatively make a written or recorded statement and have that statement presented on your behalf in court.  Your participation in the trial will help you receive compensation and restitution from the criminal that caused you damages.  The court will be able to protect you if you feel threatened in any way, as far as to relocate you, provide a protection detail and a assign new identity, if necessary.

What are my rights as the victim of a crime?

Speedy trial – all criminal cases must be brought to trial in a reasonable amount of time, generally a maximum of six months after the crime has been committed.  This may be delayed to locate witnesses, but not to specifically benefit the prosecution.  The victim of a crime has the right to be informed of the proceedings related to the criminal such as sentencing, arraignment and parole hearings.

Compensation – there will be a Crime Victims Board that will address financial relief to victims of a crime.  Persons usually have one year to file for compensation when that are victims of a crime.  States will vary on the amount of compensation that can be collected by there will be a few general categories:

– Loss of earnings

– Burial expenses of a victim that died as a result of the crime

– Cost of crime scene cleanup and initial securing of the crime scene

– Costs associated with seeking counseling and other medical expenses

– Repair and replacement of items damaged as a result of the crime

Enforcement – the victim has a right to know about actions taken against a criminal and actions that might reduce the penalty enforced on the criminal.  This includes if the criminal becomes eligible for parole or release.  Victims have a right to make victim impact statements at these hearings to sway the decisions of the law enforcement personnel as well as petition to keep enforcement on the criminal.

Harassment/Witness protection program – the victim or witness of a crime is protected against retaliation or harassment by the criminal as well as the criminal’s associates and relatives.  A witness protection program generally changes the identification of a threatened witness and maintains dedicated a protection detail to safeguard their well-being.  This prevents the possibility of witness intimidation or tampering.

There may be Federal and State protection programs.  States that offer witness protection programs include Washington DC, Texas, California, Illinois, Connecticut and New York.  The Federal Witness Protection Program covers these states plus any state that does not have such a program.  Federal witness protection will entail relocation, assumption of a new identity and protection by the US Marshalls in high threat situations.

Special visas may be granted to victims of human trafficking or foreign witnesses that provide protection in exchange for testifying against a criminal.

Proceedings – victims and families of victims are allowed to provide dispositions on the case, regarding matters such as sentencing and restitution.  In a criminal trial for any felony, the victim is allowed a victim impact statement and can address the court regarding the sentencing of the criminal.

Restitution – this is the right of the victim to be restored to the financial status they had prior to the crime.  This is related to reparation, which is payments made to the victim for damages caused by the crime.  All property held as evidence is returned to the victim, unless the court has a legitimate reason for withholding it.

Right to be informed – all victims of a crime are entitled to a free copy of the police report related to their incident.  In addition, all victims of a crime receive access to the Victim Information and Notification Everyday (VINE) hotline where you may inquire about the status of an offender and the likely release date of that offender.  The victim of a crime will be informed on a number of procedural matters related to the criminal and will also be informed if the criminal is released or escapes from prison.

In a criminal context, abandonment or withdrawal is the failure to complete a criminal action due to the defendant refusing to complete the action.  This is usually the case in criminal cases involving conspiracies and/or accomplices.  The burden of proof is on the defense with this affirmative defense and they must prove that the defendant renounced the criminal act in the process and refused to help commit the crime, even after participating in part of it.  This action must be voluntary and the risks involved with the crime must not have been apparent to the defendant.

If the defendant is the principal in a conspiracy case and prevents the individuals solicited from committing the planned crime, that individual may mounts an abandonment or withdrawal defense and prove that the plot was aborted before the illegal activity could be completed.  One may not mount an abandonment or withdrawal simply because the defendant and accomplices realized they would be caught as there is the assumption that they would have carried out the crime under normal circumstances.

The defendant making an abandonment or withdrawal defense must not only prove that they lacked criminal purpose, but also made an attempt in good faith to prevent others, generally accomplices from also committing the crime.  The individual must forsake the criminal activity voluntarily and not because they feared impending punishment or were compelled to do so.  Remember that in conspiracy cases an individual that acts as an accessory or solicits other to commit a crime has equal and often greater liability than the others representing that person’s role in facilitating the criminal activity.

For one to make an abandonment or withdrawal defense, they must be the one that informed law enforcement, contributed in no way to the crime and has disavowed the criminal activity before the crime has taken place.  Only then can this affirmative defense be successful and exempt the defendant from criminal liability.

Am abandonment or withdrawal is negated if the defendant maintains contact or affiliations with the conspirators, as this proves that the defendant has not disavowed all ties as implied by his or her abandonment or withdrawal defense.

Yes, depending on the circumstances.  If other conspirators or accomplices and their associates elude law enforcement, the state may be able to provide witness protection and other services to protect your identity.  There is Federal Witness Protection in the most extreme, high risk situations where the defendant is in real danger of retaliation for tipping off law enforcement or stopping the criminal activity.

You may be able to make a case for being under duress, which forced you to cooperate with the crime.  You had no criminal intention but had a reasonable belief that you would be harmed for not cooperating with the plot or criminal activity.

The right to counsel is established in the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution and ensures that all persons accused of a crime, regard of income, is entitled to legal representation.  Those who cannot afford a lawyer will have a public defender appointed to work on their behalf.  The quality of the legal representation is not addressed in right of counsel provision, thus imperiling a suspect with inadequate legal representation.

The protection against self-incrimination has a somewhat ambiguous application, with law enforcement allowed to waive your protection automatically if you make statements after you have been informed of your Miranda rights.  Law enforcement is even allowed to make false statements and engage in other forms of trickery to coax an incriminating statement out of the suspect.  These statements can be used in a court of law or used to influence the jury to think in a certain way about the defendant.  The right to counsel exists to protect against unfair police interrogations and prevent clients from self-incrimination.

Prior to the 1963 case of Gideon v Wainwright, the right to counsel was interpreted as providing legal aid for those involved in serious and capital offenses.  Gideon, who was accused of larceny, could not afford a lawyer and was told he state of Florida that he could only have a public defender in capital punishment cases.  Gideon served as his own legal representation and was sentenced to five years in prison.  The Supreme Court heard in the case in 1963 and determined that the selective interpretation of the sixth amendment was unconstitutional and the right to counsel was a critical component to ensuring a fair trial for the defendant.  In a subsequent trial, Gideon was allowed legal counsel who proved that the testimony used to convict Gideon was faulty, thus exonerating him.

A subsequent case, Maryland v. Shatzer found that the right to counsel would need to be invoked again if the suspect reentered police custody 2 weeks after being released.  This case derived from the questioning of Shatzer on child molestation charges that had an attorney for the first interrogation but lacked legal counsel three years later upon reopening the case and made incriminating statements that implicated him in the molestation charges.

After Gideon v Wainwright case, a formalized system of public defenders came into practice to give indigent suspects legal representation.  The lawyers are considered government employees.  There are also legal aid and legal defense associations that rely on public funds to represent clients at low cost or pro bono.

A chief public defender is elected to office in some jurisdictions and appointed in others.  Public defender offices generally employ a staff of clerical personnel, investigators, social workers and other relevant persons to assist with defending indigent clients.  In many jurisdictions, public defenders handle a large caseload and are often unfamiliar with their clients, only serving as competent yet generalized legal representation.

The Fifth Amendment of the constitution protects those accused of a crime from making statements that could be used against them in criminal court.  Those accused of a crime, despite this right, often incriminate themselves, without their knowledge, by making statements to the police.  It is advisable to make any statements only in the presence of a lawyer, to prevent implicating or incriminating oneself.

The landmark legal case, Miranda v. Arizona, requires officers to inform suspects of their protection against self-incrimination, specifically their “right to remain silent.”  Statements made prior to being informed of the right to remain silent and have an attorney present are inadmissible in court.  Subsequent court decisions, such as Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010) decided in the Supreme Court, has ruled that voluntary statements made by the suspect in police custody after being informed of Miranda rights can be interpreted as a waiver of those rights, making the statements admissible in determining the suspect’s guilt.

Any statement where the suspect admits to certain actions of behaviors can be used to incriminate them.  For instance, one that is questioned over the murder of a relative and admits to not being fond of that relative has uttered a self-incriminating statement.  This is not nearly enough to tie the individual to the murder, but is enough to establish motive.  Self-incriminating statements have been used a number of times to convict individuals for crimes, even if those statements do not constitute a confession or there is insufficient evidence.  Self-incriminating statements can also be made during police interrogations.  Police are allowed to lie and make false promises to coax a suspect into self-incrimination, thus necessitating the presence of a lawyer during police interrogations.

After you are informed of your Miranda rights, your only obligation to talk to the police is to identify yourself by stating your name and handing over identification.  Failure for the police to inform you of your Miranda rights is sufficient to invalidate an entire criminal case.  The right against self-incrimination does not cover finger printing as well as blood and other DNA tests and you must submit to these tests as requested.  Do not make any other statements without the presence of an attorney.

Pleading the fifth is the refusal to testify as the testimony entered can be used to implicate the witness in criminal actions.  This right is waived if the witness answers any questions posed by the prosecution.  If the witness is subpoenaed to testify, the witness may choose to answer no questions.  Witnesses cannot be charged with contempt of court for refusing to answer questions.  It is best to consult with an attorney prior to testifying to ensure that you will not make a self-incriminating statement.  When pleasing the Fifth, you must choose to answer all questions or answer no questions.  One cannot selectively chose questions to answer when testifying.

Months after the jury’s deliberation proved fruitless in determining guilt, a Southern California teen plead guilty for murdering his gay classmate three years ago in their junior high classroom. 

In September, a judge declared a mistrial in the case of Brandon McInerney, now aged 17, after jurors claimed a deadlock following the nine-week trial on whether he should be found guilty for manslaughter or murder. Following the announcement of a stalemate, the Ventura County District Attorney’s Office announced that McInerney would be retried on first-degree murder charges—McInerney was tried as an adult in both cases.

 McInerney eventually plead guilty to killing classmate Lawrence King as well as using a firearm in the crime. McInerney will serve 11 years for manslaughter and another 10 for using a firearm to gun-down his classmate. The plead ultimately reduced the teen’s sentence by at least 20 years—he would have served a maximum sentence of 50 years to life in prison had he not confessed. 

McInerney was just 14 when he brought a handgun, belonging to one of his relatives, to E.O. Green Junior High School in Oxnard. 

McInerney shot the 15-year-old King twice at point-blank range in the back of the head, while the two students—along with their 24 classmates–were writing papers in a computer lab for their English teacher.

King, who was habitually bullied, was proud of being openly homosexual. He often wore jewelry and makeup to school and added high-heeled boots to his school uniform. He requested to be called Leticia instead of Larry. 

McInerney’s motivation stemmed from King’s eccentricity. McInerney was often a subject of harassment because King openly talked about liking McInerney. 

The Ventura County district attorney’s office acknowledged criticism regarding its decision to try the then 15-year-old as an adult. The office, however, stood by its decision, citing the juvenile system’s inadequacies of trying a case this severe. 

King’s father, Greg, described the plea as “bittersweet”, claiming he didn’t think the sentence matched the crime but understood the court’s decision.