General Criminal Law

Deterrence At A Glance

Deterrence At A Glance

Deterrence can occur in one of two ways. Individual deterrence occurs when an offender who is responsible for taking part in illegal activities partakes in a criminal trial and legal precedence is used in order to determine the conviction and the subsequent sentence for that individual. The punishment that the individual receives will be fitting but severe and is intended to convince the criminal that taking part in illegal activities is not worth the penalties that result.
General deterrence arises on a much larger scale. Individuals who are responsible for disregarding criminal laws will be convicted in a criminal trial and punished with various penalties. These penalties are often harsh and undesirable in their own right. By ensuring that criminals receive consequences for their actions, theoretically, other individuals will be discouraged from taking part in similar activities. They will understand that individuals who are caught disregarding the law will be subject to fines or jail time.
If individuals witness other people having their lives put on hold for taking part in specific behavior, then the observers will be less likely to take part in that behavior. In general, people do not want to take part in actions that are going to be detrimental to their well-being and their futures. If they know that a there is serious legal precedence to prosecution of certain behavior and that it has severe consequences, then they may not take part in that behavior in the future.
General deterrence works through the establishment of legal precedence. In every criminal trial, a court must rule while following guidelines and legal precedence that has been established in previous cases. Legal precedence is generally established by a high court, such as the United States Federal courts. 
Once a precedent is developed, a criminal trial that possesses similar issues and factors will have a similar ruling. For example, legal precedence has determined that an individual who is responsible for murdering another person will receive a life sentence or capital punishment. 
There has been some controversy about the use of punishment for violating criminal laws as a method of deterrence. Many people argue that individuals who disregard criminal laws do not stop to consider the consequences of their actions before they engage in illegal activities. 
For example, statistics indicate that states that continue to maintain the death penalty and states that are responsible for subjecting the largest number of individuals to capital punishment also continue to maintain the largest crime rates in the country. Therefore, a criminal trial that results in court-authorized sentences is not always effective in deterring individuals from committing crimes.

What You Should Know About Criminal Law

What You Should Know About Criminal Law

Criminal law is an essential body of law and a very important legal practice. Without the establishment of criminal law and recognized punishments for violating these laws, it is likely that crime rates would be much higher than they are now.

Throughout the history of human civilization, criminal law has acted to deter individuals from partaking in harmful or dangerous behavior. This has been accomplished through the establishment of harsh and severe punishments that are imposed upon individuals who are responsible for disregarding the law. 

Without laws and regulations, citizens would be free to take part in any activity that they desired. They would be more apt to act on impulse and give into negative emotions because they would not receive legal repercussions for their actions. Therefore, chaos would be widespread.

All forms of crime would likely increase a great deal in frequency. Individuals who were not fond of another person may take part in assault or homicide because they would not need to fear capital punishment or incarceration. Drug possession, use, and distribution would be much more widespread than it is today. If an individual wanted something, he or she could take it without purchasing it.

Although the necessity of criminal law is very evident, there are still many concerns about judicial procedures. It is important that the problems and the complications that exist in criminal law be acknowledged and addressed.

Objectives

There are various different reasons why a criminal punishment will be imposed upon an individual who is responsible for violating the law. Each punishment has different goals and aims and various things can be accomplished by handing a criminal sentence to an offender who has caused harm or injury to another person. 

In general, the majority of people in the United States believe that a perpetrator should be punished for any crimes that he or she commits. Using this mentality, criminals receive criminal sentences as a form of punishment for their actions.

However, the use of criminal law to impose punishment upon an offender is a controversial topic. Many people believe that it is wrong to punish individuals who have violated the law because the law is supposed to be emotionless and the use of punishment implies that some form of emotion is present in court proceedings. Instead, these individuals believe that the criminal justice system should focus on deterrence and rehabilitation. 

Criminal sentences should be imposed in order to improve society, not to exact revenge on an offender. Therefore, when a criminal punishment is decided upon the judge should take into consideration how this punishment will effectively benefit the community. This could be by incarcerating criminals to keep dangerous offenders off of the streets. It may also be by providing criminals with education and counseling services while they are in prison so that they may grow and develop to be productive and positive members of the community. 

In some instances, an individual who has caused harm or damage to another person or to another person's property will be required to repay his or her victim or his or her community with money or with time and services.

Criminal sentences such as these help ensure that the criminal justice system is not just seeking to get even with criminals, but that the system is investing time and resources into helping criminals improve and transforming them into law abiding citizens. If this is not a possible outcome, then criminal law should be primarily concerned with keeping the public safe from dangerous individuals.

Major Aspects

Sometimes it is difficult to discern if an action or a behavior should be considered a crime. Not all harmful and detrimental behavior is carried out with malicious intent. Accidents occur that may have devastating and irreversible results. However, if an individual did not intend to harm anyone, then it seems unreasonable for them to be incarcerated with murderers and repeat violent offenders. 

Some individuals should not be sentenced to criminal punishments because they do not deserve the harsh realities of imprisonment. In situations such as this, sentencing an individual to incarceration would be considered a form of cruel and unusual punishment. The punishment that he or she receives is very disproportional to his or her behavior.

In order to avoid this, there are many different elements of a crime that must be satisfied before an individual can be convicted of taking part in criminal activity. If these aspects have not been fulfilled by the offender, then the defendant cannot be convicted of a crime because his or her behavior cannot be considered to be criminal. It is the responsibility of the prosecutor to present the court with sufficient evidence to convince the jury that each of these elements is satisfied.

The most essential part of any criminal case is evidence proving that the defendant is responsible for the crime in question. However, this is not the only element of a crime that must be satisfied. Once the prosecutor convinces the jury that the defendant has caused the damage or the injury that has occurred, he or she must also prove that the offender intended to cause this harm.

There are various different types of offenses that an individual may take part in and which may result in legal action against the offender. Illegal behavior may result in injury to another person or damage to another person's property. An offender may also face severe criminal charges if he or she had even the smallest role in criminal behavior. No matter what type of crime has been committed, all of the major aspects of a crime must be satisfied in order for a defendant to be found guilty of a crime.

Actus Reus

In order for a crime to occur an individual must first take part in an activity that has been deemed to be illegal. The illegal activity is known as actus reus. In order for an individual to be convicted of a crime a prosecutor must convince a grand jury that the defendant is responsible for the crime in question. The prosecuting attorney will be required to present evidence to the court that will leave the jury with no doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime.

The evidence that may be presented to the court includes objects that were found at the scene of the crime, documents, video recordings, DNA evidence, and witness testimonies. If this evidence is not successful in convincing the jury of the defendant's guilt, then the jury cannot convict the defendant of a crime. If the jury is going to convict an individual of a crime, then he or she must maintain no doubt that the defendant is at fault.

It is commonly believed that it is easy to determine what constitutes a legitimate actus reus. However, there is often confusion and debate regarding who is responsible for taking part in a crime. This is especially true in cases of omission. In instances of omission, the court must decide whether or not failure to partake in specific actions constitutes a crime.

It is possible for actus reus to occur as a result of the failure of an individual to behave in a certain matter. If it is known that the individual is responsible for the actus reus, then the criminal defense attorney may attempt to discredit the actus reus by trying to prove that the actus reus was not voluntary. If the offensive behavior was not voluntary then actus reus did not occur and the offender cannot be charge with a crime.

Separate Jurisdictions

One of the most important parts of a criminal investigation is discovering where a crime took place. The crime scene will provide investigators with important and invaluable clues and information. If investigators locate a crime scene they may be able to determine how a murder victim was killed, as well as gather essential evidence to support their case. Locating a crime scene is also the most reliable way to determine who has jurisdiction over a specific case.

Before a criminal investigation can really begin jurisdiction must be established. The law enforcement agency that is granted jurisdiction over a specific case will be given the right and the responsibility of collecting evidence, locating and apprehending the criminal, and presenting the evidence to a jury who will determine the fate of the criminal.

There is a range of different types of jurisdictions and various ways in which jurisdiction may be determined. Jurisdiction is often the subject of intense debate between different State governments, as well as between the Federal and the State Government. It is not uncommon for the lines between jurisdictions to become blurred and for arguments to ensue. The Government that does receive jurisdiction over a specific case will be responsible for presiding over that case.

Capital Punishment

Capital punishment is in no way a new or a unique idea. Since the beginning of history individuals have been subjected to the death penalty for various different actions and crimes. In the early history of the death penalty, torture was used as a method of entertainment for rulers and government officials. 

They developed barbaric methods of torment used to inflict intense pain and suffering upon their victims. The reasons that individuals would suffer the death penalty could vary a great deal, from high treason to the sudden whim of a dictator.

Today, many countries around the world continue to utilize the death penalty as a method of deterrence and punishment. In the United States, capital punishment is reserved for the most atrocious criminals who have been convicted of murder. n other countries around the world, the way in which the death penalty is imposed and the methods of execution would be considered to be cruel and unusual punishment by the standards of the United States. Stories regarding executions emerging from third world and underdeveloped countries are often horrific and heinous. This is not to say the practice of capital punishment in the United States is perfect or not flawed.

There are many problems and complications that continue to exist with the death penalty in the United States. Statistics regarding capital punishment illustrate a very troubling reality. Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomical discrimination are all very evident when reviewing data and information related to the imposition of the death penalty. Data indicates that wrongful convictions are possible and they occur much too frequently. 

In instances such as this, an innocent individual may be executed for a crime that he or she did not commit. It is troubling enough that an individual may spend many years in prison for someone else's crimes, but once an individual is executed there is no way to correct the mistake that has been made.

Because of these problems many political, religious, and social groups voiced concern about the use of the death penalty. As a result, numerous states have outlawed capital punishment, and the states that continue to maintain the death penalty have altered various laws regarding capital punishment.

Life Imprisonment

In recent years, public support for the death penalty has decreased a great deal. Individuals, communities, and organizations have begun to acknowledge all of the problems that exist with capital punishment. In order to address these problems, many states have banned capital punishment in favor of a life imprisonment sentence. In states where the death penalty continues to be maintained, the frequency of criminal execution has decreased a noticeable amount.

The use of life imprisonment as an alternative to capital punishment negates the possibility of irreversible and unforgivable mistakes. However, there are many individuals who feel that life imprisonment is not successful in keeping society safe from dangerous criminals. People who support the death penalty often raise valid concerns about the sentence of life in prison.

Life imprisonment sentences are not just handed to individuals who have been convicted of murder. There are many different types of crimes that may warrant a life imprisonment sentence. 

If a convicted criminal is sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, then the offender will be required to spend the rest of his or her life behind bars. However, this is not always the case.

Generally, the term life in prison is very deceiving and misleading. This is not the only factor that has caused a great deal of debate surrounding life imprisonment. There are occasions when this sentence is imposed upon juveniles who are under the age of sixteen. Many people feel that the use of this punishment on minors is unconstitutional.

While life imprisonment sentences have been the subject of copious amounts of argument, judicial officials do take important steps in order to ensure that dangerous criminals who pose a continuous threat to the community remain in jail. 

Individuals who oppose the death penalty often cite the possibility of wrongful convictions and the decreased cost of life imprisonment as two primary reasons to abolish capital punishment despite the problems that continue to exist with the life sentence.

Purpose of Punishment

The use of criminal sentencing as a form of punishment for individuals who have violated the law has been a subject of a great deal of debate for a long period of time. Individuals who are convicted of breaking the law are sentenced to a criminal punishment which they must serve. 

This punishment may range in severity from minor fines to long term incarceration. The punishment will generally depend on the goal that the Government and the judicial authority is attempting to achieve. If their primary goal is to deter the individual from committing crimes in the future and to prevent other individuals from taking part in similar criminal behavior, then the criminal’s punishment must be harsh and severe.

There are many different goals that may be accomplished through the use of criminal punishment. The severity of the punishment will often vary from one convicted criminal to another, even if the crimes that have been committed were the same. This is because the judge has the ability to consider all of the aspects of a criminal case and determine an effective punishment that is fitting for each particular defendant. 

The inconsistency of criminal punishment is another topic that has raised a great deal of concern. If there is not a set and standard punishment for all individuals who commit the same crime, then there is room for prejudice and discrimination on the part of the judge.

However, the imposition of mandatory minimum sentencing laws and Federal sentencing guidelines have also caused many problems because first time offenders of certain crimes are receiving the same harsh punishment as career criminals. Criminal punishments present judicial officials with many complications which need to be addressed and resolved.  

Criminal Defense

A criminal law case requires two attorneys to compete against each other in order to convince the jury to believe their individual cases. The prosecutor will be utilizing evidence and witness testimony in order to prove that the defendant is guilty of the crime in question. A criminal defense attorney will be countering all of the claims of the prosecutor and attempting to cause the jury to doubt their client's guilt. 

Even if the criminal lawyer cannot prove the defendant's innocence, all he or she needs to do is provide sufficient evidence and information to make the jury question the guilt of the defendant. If the jury has any reason to doubt that the defendant is guilty then it cannot convict the defendant of a crime.

In many cases, the evidence overwhelmingly proves that a defendant is responsible for the crime of which he or she is being accused. In instances such as this, it is the responsibility of the criminal defense attorney to develop a convincing and adequate criminal defense that will negate their client's criminal culpability.

There are many different criminal defenses that criminal lawyers may choose to employ in a criminal case. Generally, these defenses seek to prove that a defendant cannot be held accountable for their crimes for a number of different reasons. In most instances, it will be because of a diminished or compromised mental state that has caused the defendant to act out of character.

Many criminal defenses surround psychological disorders that have developed in the defendant. Other defenses claim that physical, social, or environmental factors caused unusual behavior in the defendant. No matter which stance a criminal defense attorney decides to adopt, he or she must be very convincing. 

A successful criminal defense will effectively negate or diminish their client’s accountability, therefore lessening the severity of their conviction and sentence. 

Definition of Individual Deterrence

Definition of Individual Deterrence

Criminal laws are often established in order to prevent individuals from taking part in detrimental behavior that has been deemed illegal. Thus, one of the primary objectives of sentencing individuals who violate criminal laws is deterrence. Laws are developed in order to ensure that the safety and the well-being of citizens is protected and upheld. Individuals who disregard these laws endanger the well-being of themselves and others, and are therefore tried in criminal courts.
Deterrence may manifest in multiple ways. Individual deterrence occurs when criminals are punished in criminal courts for their behavior. Deterrence results when an individual experiences a punishment that discourages them from taking part in the same behavior again. The penalties that they have experienced are aimed at convincing the offender that taking part in illegal actions is not worth the consequences that they will face. Offenders are tried in criminal courts in order to determine what punishment will act as an effective deterrent.
Once perpetrators have been convicted of a crime in criminal courts, the judge will deliberate on an appropriate sentence. Sentencing the criminal to an adequate punishment is the most important factor of deterrence. If the punishment is not proportional with the crime that was committed, then the sentence may not effectively deter the criminal from partaking in illegal activities in the future. 
Deterring an individual from disregarding criminal laws may help to save lives. One common example of deterrence is the punishment for driving under the influence. An individual who is charged with driving under the influence may experience several penalties for their behavior, including fines, jail time, and the revocation of their license. The fines are often very expensive and may include fees ranging from a few hundred dollars to thousands of dollars. They may be required to spend up to a few months in prison.
Also, individuals who are caught driving while intoxicated will have their license suspended for numerous months. This will affect the offender’s day-to-day routine. They may experience trouble getting to and from work, or running basic errands.
This can also be applied to more serious offenses that are tried in criminal courts, such as robbery, assault, and sexual offenses. These crimes are extremely severe and may result in extensive physical harm for victims who are involved in these cases. Therefore, it is essential to determine sentences that are severe enough to deter criminals from taking part in this behavior again once they are released from prison. However, the punishment cannot be so severe that it is considered to be unusually cruel or disproportionate.

What are Infancy Special Defenses?

What are Infancy Special Defenses?

When involved in a criminal case, it is extremely important to become familiar with criminal defense law and to develop an adequate and effective defense. There are many different types of criminal defenses and stances that an offender may decide to take. Adopting successful and believable criminal defenses is the key to escaping conviction or receiving a lighter sentence.
One of the more common and seemingly straightforward types of criminal defenses is the infancy defense. The infancy defense may be used when a defendant is a minor who is under the age designated to be the legal age of criminal liability. Criminal defense law recognizes that children do not have the same cognitive ability as adults. Their brains are still maturing and developing, and therefore, they do not have adequate impulse control and are likely to act on negative feelings and emotions.
Children are incapable of effectively evaluating and understanding the consequences and effects of their actions. Therefore, children cannot be held liable for any criminal activity in which they take part. Federal criminal defense law has established an age that denotes when children become criminally liable for their actions. In the United States, a child cannot be held legally accountable for criminal activities if they are under the age of seven. However, this minimum age may vary a great deal from one State to another.
The majority of states within the United States have not established a minimum age in which defendants can employ infancy criminal defenses. Criminal defense law in the states of New Jersey, California, Idaho, Utah, and Texas do not hold minors liable for criminal activity if they are under the age of fourteen. Georgia, New Hampshire, New York and Illinois will not convict a child under the age of thirteen of a crime. 
These states believe that a child is not capable of intentionally committing a crime until they reach age of criminal responsibility. A minor who has not yet reached this age does not have the experience or the intellectual capacity to understand the consequences that would result from their actions. Therefore, they cannot be charged with a crime.
In other states, criminal defense law reflects the belief that even young children are aware that certain actions are wrong and detrimental. In these states, infancy criminal defenses may not be successful in avoiding legal responsibility. Instead, a minor may be tried and sentenced in the juvenile justice system.
Juvenile justice systems have been developed because states believe that minors should be held accountable for their actions, but they cannot be treated the same as adults because they do not have the same experiences, education, and physiology as adults. However, most states have established criminal defense law that does recognize certain instances in which a juvenile should be tried as an adult. In instances such as these, infancy criminal defenses will generally not be successful in absolving criminal liability.
There are many factors that are taken into consideration when debating the necessity and morality of trying a minor as an adult. These factors include the juvenile’s criminal history, the child’s age, and the severity of the crime that they have committed

International Death Penalty

International Death PenaltyThe capital punishment debate is not exclusive to the United States. Countries throughout the world practice capital punishment

The Separate Jurisdictions of International Law

The Separate Jurisdictions of International Law

International law is a very complex and often confusing topic. Throughout the majority of history, international law has focused much less on individuals than State and Federal law. International law generally focuses on entire states or on oppressive and violent governments.
International laws have been established in order to govern the way in which states and countries interact with each other. In recent decades, international laws have begun to focus on the apprehension and the punishment of dangerous individuals. In most cases, the creation of international laws falls to the United Nations. However, international law is often very difficult to enforce because international relations criticize violating the rights of a sovereign state.
Each country is responsible for governing its own territory and in most cases it is not considered to be acceptable to interfere with the way in which a government chooses to manage its own country. Interfering with the governing of a sovereign state may lead to a war between countries. 
However, there are some instances when the necessity for international laws is very apparent. On occasion, a country will take it upon itself to enforce international law if it feels that international security relies on the apprehension of an individual or a government that is posing a threat to the safety of other states.
In general, international laws are related to crimes against humanity. Usually, crimes against humanity are committed by a government or a regime. The occurrence of these crimes are not isolated incidents. Instead this heinous behavior is symptomatic of the way a government chooses to function. Crimes against humanity include actions such as torture, homicide, and rape.

Involuntary Intoxication

Involuntary IntoxicationCriminal defense firms are responsible for developing a convincing and effective defense for an individual who is being accused of committing a crime. A criminal defense firm will analyze all of the facts and circumstances of a case and will then determine the best stance to take.

Can the Death Penalty Be Applied to Juveniles?

Can the Death Penalty Be Applied to Juveniles?

Throughout the history of capital punishment, juvenile death penalty has been a topic of a great deal of debate and argument. Since capital punishment began being practiced in the American colonies in the 1600s, over 350 individuals who were under the age of eighteen at the time that the crime in question was committed have been executed. 
 
 
Despite the fact that numerous states have banned the execution of individuals who were minors at the time of the crime, over twenty individuals have been executed for juvenile capital offenses since the death penalty was reestablished in 1976.
 
 
There are many states that argued against the execution of juvenile offenders, claiming that minors are not as educated or experienced as adults. Therefore, they do not possess the knowledge and the cognitive function to fully understand the consequences of their actions. They are also much more likely to give in to peer pressure or to act as a result of strong emotions. They will often act before evaluating the effects that their actions will have.
 
 
Individuals who were not for the death penalty for juvenile offenders claimed that because of their frequent irresponsible behavior, minors are not given the same rights and responsibilities as adults. They cannot be trusted to effectively handle these rights and responsibilities. Therefore, it is ludicrous to impose the same sentence on minors who have committed a capital offense that is imposed on adults who are sentenced to execution.
 
 
The debate regarding juvenile death penalty practices was resolved when the Supreme Court ruled against the execution of juvenile offenders. However, this subject continues to be a topic of concern on an international level

What are the Court Processes for Death Penalty?

What are the Court Processes for Death Penalty?

Capital punishment pros and cons are often the subject of heated debates. Whilst many individuals cite reasons against capital punishment, the large majority of states continue to maintain the death penalty in order to inflict punishment, protect society, and deter other criminals from taking part in similar detrimental crimes.
 
 
Due to the large number of capital punishment pros and cons, the State prosecuting a capital case must ensure that all of the necessary procedures are effectively carried out in order to guarantee that the defendant is guilty of the crime in question and that the death penalty is a warranted punishment.If the jury finds the defendant to be guilty, then the case will progress to the sentencing phase. 
 
 
During this phase of the court process a judge will weigh the capital punishment pros and cons. He or she will need to seriously consider the reasons for and against capital punishment in a particular case, considering all of the conditions and aspects of the crime in question, including the severity and brutality of the crime, the motivation, and any remorse that is being expressed by the defendant. 
 
 
Once the judge has weighed all of the capital punishment pros and cons, he or she will determine whether the defendant will be sentenced to life in prison or to death.
 
 
During the appeal process, the defendant will attempt to present the court with sufficient reasons against capital punishment. Officials will determine whether the evidence that was presented is an adequate basis for capital punishment, whether legal errors were present during the hearing, and whether the defendant's court-appointed attorney was successful in providing the defendant with adequate legal counsel. 
 
 
If the defendant can prove that any of these factors were compromised, then the appeals court will overturn the ruling and the case will go back to trial. If the appeal does not overturn the sentence, then generally only the governor of the state in which the capital trial is occurring may choose to grant the defendant clemency.
 
 
If clemency is granted, then the offender will be pardoned of capital punishment and will instead receive life in prison. If clemency is not granted, then a date will be set for the execution of the convict.
 
 
There are various capital punishment pros and cons, and because of the nature of capital punishment and the heated debate surrounding the death penalty, states must ensure that all necessary steps are carried out in order to guarantee that no irreversible mistakes are made, as well as that the defendant is granted all of their Constitutional rights.

Crimes That Warrant the Death Penalty

Crimes That Warrant the Death Penalty

A great deal of capital punishment debate has surrounded the crimes punishable by the death penalty. Many individuals and authorities who have taken a stand in the death penalty debate do not feel that the death penalty should be used at all. Others believe that this punishment should only be sentenced in cases in which a victim has been killed.
 
 
In general, the death penalty is reserved for individuals who have committed felony murder or capital murder. However, there are other crimes that may be punished by the death penalty. The capital punishment debate has sparked a great deal of controversy and has gained national attention.
 
 
The death penalty debate has created a capacious amount of argument regarding what offenses should be considered capital crimes to be punished by the death penalty. Many individuals who are involved in the capital punishment debate believe that rape should be punished by the death penalty. 
 
 
Rape is a horrific and heinous crime which may have many detrimental and long lasting psychological effects on the victim. In cases of severe and violent rape, the victim may sustain extensive physical injury leading to permanent physical damage.
 
 
A large number of parties who have taken a stand in the death penalty debate believe that subjecting a victim to this atrocious behavior warrants execution. Other individuals do not believe that all instances of rape should result in the perpetrator's death, but if the victim of the rape is a child, then the offender should be sentenced to death.
 
 
Various states throughout the United States have supported the use of the death penalty for offenders who are responsible for the rape of a child. In the capital punishment debate, Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Louisiana, Montana, and Georgia have fought for the death penalty for individuals who have subjected a child to rape. Each of these states have enacted a law that allows the death penalty to be imposed on offenders who raped a minor.
 
 
The State of Louisiana sentenced two men to be executed for child rape. However, the Supreme Court ruled against these states in the death penalty debate. The Supreme Court found that despite the horrific and adverse effects of rape, the death penalty was a disproportionately severe punishment for perpetrators who rape another individual, even if their victim is a child. Since capital punishment was reinstated, no convict has been executed for rape. Instead, individuals who are responsible for repeated incidents of sexual assault will be sentenced to life in prison.

Attorneys, Get Listed

X