Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Criminal Law -- Fall 2023 > Criminalization & Punishment > Flashcards

Criminalization & Punishment Flashcards

Week 1 Material Victims, Criminalization, Over-Criminalization, Constraints on Criminalization, Rationales for Punishment, Constraints on Type & Amount of Punishment

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MPRE flashcards MBE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

Define & Give Examples:

Secondary Victimization

A

Additional Emotional harm victims endure due to interactions with the criminal justice system
Examples: During investigation & trial process; from prosecution, defense attorneys and judges

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Trauma Processing for Victims: 4 Steps

Victimization

A
  1. Initial Reaction (shock, anger)
  2. Disorganization (depression, substance abuse, relationship issues)
  3. Reconstruction (Therapy)
  4. Acceptance
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Define:

Vulnerability & Resiliency Perspectives

Victimization

A

Future Trauma Reactions in Victims
* Vulnerability Perspective: someone exposed to trauma is more vulnerable in the future
* Resiliency Perspective: someone exposed & copes well will have resistance to future trauma

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Sources of Criminalization

A

Constitution, Common Law, Statute

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Definition of a Crime

A
  1. Prohibited social harm
  2. Caused by morally blame-worthy behavior
  3. result = def is morally condemned by the community
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What distinguishes a Crime from a Tort?

A

Crime = moral condemnation by criminal justice system

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Problems Caused by Over Criminalization

A
  • leads to discrimination
  • dilutes stigmas of crimes
    –criminal law is only for conduct viewed as “deserving of severest condemnation”
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Solutions to Over Criminalization

A
  • Ask if justifies deprivation of liberty
  • Restore penal code to harmful & violent behaviors
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Define:

“Broken Window” Theory

A
  • Reason people are engaging in big crimes is because of the disorder around them
  • Crack down on small crimes = reduction of big crimes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Define & Rationale:

Legality Principle

A
  • Definition: no crime without law, no punishment without law
  • Rationale: no ex-post facto crime making; requires legislature to make crimes

Common Law Restraint on Criminalization

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Define & Rationale:

Rule of Specificity

A
  • Definition: Criminal laws should provide SPECIFIC guidance
  • Example: Marquan Case = cyberbullying provision criminalized broad spectrum of behavior outside popular understanding

Common Law Restraint on Criminalization

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Define & Rationale:

Lenity Rule

A
  • Definition: Unresolvable, ambiguous statutes are interpreted in DEFENDANT’S favor
  • Rationale: State should not benefit from poor drafting

Common Law Restraint on Criminalization

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Define:

Rule of Fair Import

A
  • Definition: Encourages interpreting a statute to further the general purposes of that statute

Common Law Restraint on Criminalization

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Define:

Bill of Attainder

A

Article 1, Sec 9
Cannot adopt a statute specifically targeting a PERSON or GROUP without trial

Constitutional Restraints on Criminal Law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Define:

Ex Post Facto

A

Article 1, Sec 10
Def cannot be punished for a crime that was not on the books at the time

Constitutional Restraints on Criminal Law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Define:

Due Process

A

5th &14th Amendments
* Right to life, liberty, property
* Gov’t may NOT infringe upon certain fundamental rights without compelling reason

Constitutional Restraints on Criminal Law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Define:

Equal Protection

A

5th & 14th Amendments
* Cannot discriminate based on CLASS or RACE
* Ex: Loving v. VA (interracial marriage)

Constitutional Restraints on Criminal Law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Define:

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

A

8th Amendment
Punishment Cannot:
* Be offensive to human dignity or target individuals or groups for who they are (example: addicts)

  • Be Excessive
    —unrelated to purposes of punishment
    —grossly disproportionate to the crime

Constitutional Restraints on Criminal Law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

YES or NO

Is it permissible for the gov’t to criminalize free speech?

A

YES

verbal threats, incitement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Define:

Felony

Classification of Crimes

A

More than one year in prison

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Define:

Misdemeanor

Classification of Crimes

A

Less than one year in prison

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Define & Example

Malum in Se

A

“Wrongful in itself”
Example: Murder
Defendant breached a social norm
Requires proof of def’s mental state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Define & Example

Malum prohibitum

A

Wrongful based on legislative/administrative decisions
Ex: Environmental Violations
Strict liability offense = does NOT require mental state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

List the Five Rationales for Punishment

A
  • Retribution
  • Rehabilitation
  • Incapacitation
  • Specific Deterrence
  • General Deterrence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Define & Criticize

Retribution

Rationales for Punishment

A
  • What do you deserve?
  • Backwards-looking (focused solely on what the individual did)
  • Critics = too much like vengeance
26
Q

Define & Criticize

Rehabilitation

Rationales for Punishment

A
  • Forwards Looking
  • Behavior Correction
  • Individualistic to each offender
  • Critics = too much discretion given to judges
  • Prof’s Take = not effective due to underfunding

Think Quakers = penitentiaries = penance = atone for sins with God

27
Q

Define & Criticize

Incapacitation

Rationales for Punishment

A
  • Forwards Looking
  • Purpose = prevent defendant from committing more crimes
  • Critics & Prof’s View = requires a prediction of behavior; not very good at doing
28
Q

Define & Criticize

Specific Deterrence

Rationales for Punishment

A
  • Forward Looking
  • Purpose= teach this specific def a lesson so they do not reoffend
29
Q

Define & Criticize

General Deterrence

Rationales for Punishment

A
  • Forward Looking
  • Purpose = deter OTHERs from engaging in behavior
  • Critics= allows for punishment of innocents (punishing innocents will deter guilty)
30
Q

Define

Brutalization Effect

A
  • Counterintuitively, by imposing punishment on society, we are actually validating it
  • Ex: parents who hit children = teaches children hitting is ok

Punishment

31
Q

Define

Legality Principle

A
  • Legislature makes the laws & establishes ranges for punishments
  • Judiciary interprets laws & determines specific punishments
  • also makes sure laws do not conflict with Constitution
32
Q

Define

Standards of Decency &
Factors in Interpreting

A

Step 1. History
Step 2. What society currently thinks
(legislature, juries, public opinion)
Step 3. Court’s independent judgment

Factors: proportionality of offense to crime, similar cases in same jurisdiction & other jurisdictions

interpreting the 8th Amendment

33
Q

List

What are the five situations where a failiure to act (omission) is deemed to be the equivalent of affirmative action?

A

Common Law:
1. Special Relationship
2. Creation of the Harm
3. Voluntary assumption of the care that prevents others from aid

  1. Contractual Duty
  2. Statutory Duty
34
Q

Async Question: T/F

All involuntary acts are non-volititional

A

FALSE because acts under duress are involuntary (gun to the head) but are still volitional
Need to raise the duress defense

35
Q

Async Question: T/F

While epileptic seizures are generally not volitional, sometimes they could be deemed volitional

A

True: in cases where someone should have taken their seizure medication but did not

36
Q

Async Question: T/F

While sleepwalking is generally not volitional, hypnotic behavior generally is volitional

A

False: convulsions, sleepwalking, and hypnotic behaviors are non-volitional

37
Q

Async Question: T/F

Habitual Behavior is volitional

A

True

38
Q

Asynch Question: T/F

Acts include affirmative conduct and wrongful thoughts.

A

False: Wrongful thoughts are not part of actus reus

39
Q

Async Question

Three issues that are the subject of inquiry with respect to the def’s mental functioning at the time of the crime

A

Actus Reus, Mens Rea, Affirmative Defenses

40
Q

Async Question: T/F

Under the Common Law, there is a duty to act to help one’s spouse. There is a similar duty to act towards one’s children.

A

True: special status relationship

41
Q

Async Questions: T/F

Under the Common Law, there is a duty to act as a Good Samaritan and help any person who needs assistance.

A

False: no legal obligation under the Common Law

42
Q

Async Questions: T/F

Under the Common Law, there is a duty to act if one voluntarily assumes care in such a manner that others are prevented from rendering aid.

A

True

43
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

Private contracts cannot be used to create a duty to act for criminal law purposes.

A

FALSE: Contractual obligations can give rise to a duty to act, such as for babysitters.

44
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

One may have a statutory duty to act, such as when someone is certified by the state as an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT).

A

True

45
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

Possessing an item is the equivalent of committing affirmative conduct if the defendant knowingly procured or received the item.

A

True

46
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

Possessing an item is the equivalent of committing affirmative conduct if the defendant retained possession of an item after being aware of control over it for any amount of time.

A

FALSE:
Possessing an item is the equivalent of committing affirmative conduct if the defendant retained possession of an item after being aware of control over it for such a sufficient period of time to have ended control over it.

47
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

It is sufficient for purposes of imposing criminal liability if it is determined that the defendant’s conduct was the actual cause (i.e. cause-in-fact) of the social harm.

A

False: Need BOTH actual cause AND proximate cause

48
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

When more than one actor’s conduct contributes to the prohibited social harm, the Common Law determines the liability of the defendant whose actions set forth the events based on whether the “intervening” cause was a “superseding” one.

A

True

48
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

A defendant can be the proximate cause for a crime without being the actual cause of the crime.

A

FALSE: need to be both the actual and proximate cause

49
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

An “intervening cause” is an independent force — another “but-for” cause — that operates in producing social harm, but which only comes into play after the defendant’s voluntary act has been committed or his omission has occurred.

A

True

50
Q

Asynch Questions: T/F

When an intervening cause relieves the defendant of criminal responsibility, the law generally describes that intervening event as the “superseding cause” of the social harm.

A

True

51
Q

Define the De Minimis Contribution to the Harm Factor

A

Actus Reus, Proximate Cause: Factors that determine whether intervening becomes superceding

De minimis Limitation is where the intervening cause played too minor a role to rise to superceding.

52
Q

Define the Reasonable Foreseeability Contribution to the Harm Factor

A

Actus Reus, Proximate Cause: Factors that determine whether intervening becomes superceding

responsive intervening cause: occurs in
response to def’s wrongful conduct; generally
will not relieve initial wrongdoer

coincidental intervening cause:
generally will relieve def of
wrongdoing unless it was foreseen

53
Q

Define the “Def’s Mens Rea” Contribution to the Harm Factor

A

Actus Reus, Proximate Cause: Factors that determine whether intervening becomes superceding

We look at Def’s Mens Rea
“intended consequences can
never be too remote”

54
Q

Define “Dangerous Forces Come to Rest” Contribution to the Social Harm

A

Actus Reus, Proximate Cause: Factors that determine whether intervening becomes superceding

Court follows the defendants violence until it ends

55
Q

Define the “Free, Deliberate Human Intervention” Contribution to the Harm Factor

A

Actus Reus, Proximate Cause: Factors that determine whether intervening becomes superceding

When intervening individual acts freely, def
will be more likely to be released
of criminal liability

56
Q

Define the “Omission” Contribution to the Harm Factor

A

Actus Reus, Proximate Cause: Factors that determine whether intervening becomes superceding

Omission of a duty will rarely supersede an
earlier, operative wrongful act

57
Q

Of the five rationales for punishment, which is backwards looking?

A

Retribution (focused solely on what the defendant did)
Rehabilitation, incapacitation, specific & general deterrence all are forwards looking

58
Q

Of the Five Rationales for Punishment, which one seems to alllow for the punishment of innocent behavior?

A

General Deterrence (purpose is to deter others from doing the behavior)
Example: if goal is to encourage good driving, punishing epileptics who drive will accomplish this

59
Q

What test does Supreme Court Adopt in Solem v. Helm to evaluate 8th Amendment proportionality of punishment in non-death penalty cases?

A

Gravity of the offense/harshness of the penalty
Sentences imposed in the same jurisdiction
Sentences imposed in other jurisdictions

60
Q

What factors does SC identify in Harmelin v. Michigan to guide court’s application of the 8th Amendment in non-death penalty cases?

A
  1. Primacy of the Legislature
  2. Variety of legitimate penological schemes
  3. Nature of the federal System
  4. Objective factors guiding proportionality review
  5. “Grossly disporportionate” sentences

Criminal Law -- Fall 2023 (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions