Defenses and Due Process Kylee Rivers CJS/220 Defenses and Due Process According to Gardner and Anderson (2011), an individual is only charged for a crime he/she committed intentionally. He suggests that such a crime must be without defense so that an individual is declared guilty. Defenses are situations that can stop or lessen the guilt in a case. Presentations of evidence for such situations ensure an accused person is defended from guilt. According to Gardner and Anderson (2011), the common elements of defense include insanity, entrapment and self-defense.
However, prohibition against double jeopardy does not preclude the crime victim from bringing a civil suit against that same person to recover damages (Miller & Jentz, 2008, pg 137). The Lectric Law Library at lectlaw.com (1995-2012) states that “the double jeopardy clause protects against three distinct abuses: 1. a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, 2. a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction; and 3. multiple punishments for the same offense. In this case Armington is incorrect. Armington was tried and convicted of the crime of armed robbery and assault and battery. The civil tort suit is completely different and therefore does not fall under double jeopardy.
United States, 1932. It states basically that a person cannot be tried for lesser and greater crimes using the same evidence in subsequent trials. A person can be tried on lesser and greater crimes using the same evidence if the crimes are tried together in one trial. This does not constitute double jeopardy because the defendant is not tried twice using the same evidence. The Blockburger test, in the Court's words is this, "The test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does
The state statute for murder (statute 782.04) states that the unlawful killing of a human being without any premeditated design to affect the death of any particular individual is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony in the first degree. Mr. Malinger cannot be lawfully executed with the insanity defense, due to the fact that he is not insane. Florida statute 775.027, the insanity defense, states that a person is considered insane if the defendant has a mental infirmity; which is proven to be true (pg. 78); but, the insanity defense also states that because of such an infirmity, the defendant either did not know what he or she was doing, or did not know it was wrong. Mr. Malinger constantly brags about his cunning throughout the story (pgs.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
Offenders can be a combination of any of these three classifications. However, there is an issue with blanket statements because each hate is an individual case, as every individual has had a different life and different incentives. Ironically enough, the most severe Offenders of “hate crime” are victims themselves. Sullivan comes to the conclusion that hate crime is an unnecessary classification under “crime’ and shouldn’t carry a different sentence than crime itself. He ends with a general statement that hate can only be overcome by the success of the victims, and their being unaffected by “ignoring the bigot’s
Leo Coates June 2013 Q4 - Involuntary manslaughter Involuntary manslaughter is defined as the unlawful killing of a reasonable creature under the Queen's peace without malice aforethought. It is a less serious crime than murder as it does not require the full mens rea – intent. There are three types of involuntary manslaughter, which are committed in different ways – reckless manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, and constructive manslaughter. Robert is potentially guilty of constructive act manslaughter, where there is an unlawful killing that occurs when another crime is taking place intentionally or recklessly. The case of Franklin (1883) demonstrates that for a defendant to be found guilty of constructive manslaughter, the
They may, of course, be permitted to engage in certain authorized conduct that would be a crime if committed by regular citizens (such as the use of deadly force in appropriate circumstances). ● Civil lawsuits against government officials—the police, mainly—can be filed when neither the exclusionary rule nor other criminal remedies apply. Section 1983 litigation requires the plaintiff to show that a constitutional rights violation was committed by an official acting under color of state law. Section 1983 lawsuits can be filed against individual police officers, supervisors,
MIDTERM 1 Running Head: MIDTERM Midterm Project Search and Seizure Linda Branstrom Kaplan University CJ 299: Associates Capstone in Criminal Justice Professor Terry Campbell April 22, 2012 MIDTERM 2 Abstract It is firmly ingrained in our system of law that searches conducted outside the judicial process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate, are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, subject to only a few specifically established exceptions. The courts have outlined a number of exceptions to the warrant requirement including but not limited to, consent searches, searches of vehicles and, inventory searches. One exception the court has expressly and repeatedly refused to recognize is a general
The Due Process Model is a process that works on the assumption that the criminal justice system has errors, and because of those errors a defendant is not guilty until proven otherwise. The Due Process Model allows for a defendant to bring about any claims in their