Supreme Court Case: Missouri V. Frye

911 Words4 Pages
Criminal Law Paper Lisa Copeland CJA 354 April 15, 2013 Phillip Pollock, Facilitator Criminal Law Paper A thought provoking case that was appealed to the Supreme Court was Missouri v. Frye. The most intriguing aspect of this case was the inequality in which the defense counsel provided and the defendant Frye was adamant on carrying out the identical offense numerous times. There are numerous bases and authorities associated to the various aspects of criminal law that also correlates to the particulars of this Supreme Court case. This case does encompass criminal liability as well as accomplice liability. There is little difference between the two liabilities. Criminal liability occurs when an individual takes accountability for a crime that has been committed, and accomplice liability is can occur as an individual assists another individual during the commission of a crime. A guilty act is known as actus reus whereas a guilty mind is mens rea. The equality right is concurrence. To show criminal liability, it is essential to have actus reus and mens rea. This case is based on an individual who had been driving under revocation. The defendant Frye had been arrested twice…show more content…
I do not believe this case involves accomplice liability, only criminal liability. Mr. Frye was not blind to the possibility of his future because he kept getting arrested for driving under revocation. Mr. Frye knew that he had done wrong, but so had his attorney. He slacked off when it came to the plea agreements. Everyone is entitled to the best plea and or sentence that are afforded by the

More about Supreme Court Case: Missouri V. Frye

Open Document