Everyone has the capacity to commit crimes but not everyone has the mental capacity or criminal capacity to understand the crime committed. Criminal capacity has a profound impact on the defense process. How can previous court case data support the connection between criminal convictions and criminal capacity? First a little explanation of justification. The definition for justification is a type of legal defense in which the defendant admits to committing the act in question but claims it was necessary to avoid some greater evil (Schmallege, Hall, & Dolatowski, 2010).
It was proved that the defendant was guilty of rape by his dna, also the fact that he was menacing people with a shotgun, which is how the taking of the DNA came about to prove him guilty of rape. Accomplice liability does not apply to this case; accomplice liability allows the courts to find a person criminally liable for acts committed by another person. If a person aids, assist or encourages another in the commission of a crime they are an accomplice to the crime, while the person who actually commits the act is called the” principal”. However, when determining what is accomplice liability and criminal liability a court needs to examine factors and intent of both the principal and the accomplice (www.legalmatch.com). The elements of crime are a series of components that must be present in order for it to be demonstrated that someone is guilty of a crime.
Legal defenses can have a signification effect on disposition of the case. Factual Defense In a criminal trial when factual defense is used the defendant and attorney are claiming to the courts the defendant had nothing to do with the crime which took place. The defendant is insisting he or she is not to be held criminally liable for the charges brought forth by the state. The defendant may say he or she was in was not in the location of the crime at the time of the crime and may have an alibi as evidence (Schmalleger, Hall, Dolatowski, 2010). Legal Defense Justification and excuse is the two forms of legal defense.
One of the most controversial issues society faces today is the death penalty, especially when involving juveniles. People see it as cruel and unusual especially for juveniles because their so young and immature and they don’t have the mental culpability to understand the outcome of their actions. The juvenile justice system main goal is rehabilitation, not punishment. Two major cases that impacted the Juvenile Justice system, regarding juveniles and execution are Stanford v Kentucky and Roper v Simmons. Stanford v Kentucky was a United States Supreme court case that dealt with the imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were at least sixteen years old at the time the crime was committed.
To sentence a defendant under the two and three strikes provision, he or she must be convicted of a felony offense. The crimes that qualify as strikes are such as rape, murder, robbery, crimes ending in great body injuries, burglary at residential homes, kidnap and forceful sex crimes. Opinions for Three-Strikes Law A person who is convicted of the current offense and has suffered one or more
Personal Crime Personal crimes are crimes that occur on a personal level and affect the victim in a personal way. There are different types of crimes that are considered personal. I am going to go over a few such as homicide, assault, battery, mayhem, rape and statutory rape. Homicide is when; one human being kills another human being. When someone premeditates the crime of murder and follows through that is called, first-degree murder.
In most murder cases criminals who commit heinous crimes have used the insanity defense in pleading their cases. I’ve heard about a lot of people who have committed unspeakable crimes plead insanity in the preceding court trials. Would you let someone like this hide behind this plea and basically get away with murder? A criminal who was in his right state of mind meaning they knew what they were doing shouldn’t be able to use the insanity defense. In this speech I am going to tell you about the types of insanity defense that are used in court cases, the process that goes into verifying a criminals sanity, and the issues that come about after a plea is entered.
Juvenile Crime and the Criminal Justice System University of Phoenix Associates Program Adolescents and teens who commit crimes or criminal activities are considered juvenile criminals. The crimes they commit are not treated the same as the crimes committed by an adult, in most cases. There are many reasons that may cause an adolescent or teen to become a juvenile criminal or delinquent but there is no specific data that can indicate what causes the behavior in a juvenile to commit criminal activities. There are differences between adult court and juvenile court but in certain situations, a juvenile may tried as an adult. For instance, if a juvenile commits a criminal activity that is serious on nature, such as rape or murder, the juvenile will not be processed through the juvenile system but through the adult court system.
Should juvenile offenders be tried and punished as an adult A juvenile offender is defined by Webster’s Dictionary as a person under the age of 18 that has been charged with a crime. The American legal justice system, should they treat juvenile violent offenders as adults? Harsh sentencing won’t acts as a deterrent? Juveniles are not competent to stand trial. Juveniles would not become repeated offenders.
Different states have different rules on when the capital punishment penalty applies and when it does not. Normally, I do not agree with applying such extreme punishment unless it can be proved without any doubt that this person who is accused is guilty. It should also be one of the heinous acts of being a serial killer or a child killer. It’s better when a true confession, with evidence to back up the confession, has been obtained. There is nothing worse than to have a doubt that the person already executed could be an innocent person.