M1: Introduction Flashcards
Name the primary purpose of criminal law.
Community censure and public condemnation for violating the social contract. This provides us with a working set of rules to move us toward our ideal society.
Identify the major differences and the main distinction between criminal and civil law.
Private vs public
+ Criminal law is public, civil law is private
+ Prosecutor acts for all of us in criminal cases, private attorneys act for their client
+ The available penalties are different (criminal law penalties are higher)
+ Public condemnation is a goal of criminal law, social compensation is the goal in civil law cases
+ Moral stigma attaches in criminal law, no moral stigma in civil law cases
+ Higher burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) in criminal cases vs balance of probabilities in civil cases
Identify the four major sources of criminal law in the United States.
Common law, criminal law statutes, model penal code, the Constitution (as an interpretive tool)
Explain the purpose of Common Law, the MPC and statutes in modern criminal law.
a. Common law is judge made law. We use it to provide context and history where there are gaps in the law, and to give us a sense of the original views.
b. MPC is a comprehensive, internally consistent model of the criminal law. States use it to examine the progressive position, or at least a position that is consistent and steeped in the concept of mens rea culpability
c. Statutes provide specific application of law to specific situation. They are the legislators making the law in accordance with their role.
Identify and order the basic criminal procedure involved in a criminal case from the first report of the crime (18 steps).
1: Report of a crime
Identify the major players in a criminal proceeding and their roles
judge, defendant, jury (or trier of fact), defense counsel, prosecutor
Identify 2 major effects of our current criminal procedure.
1) The steps in criminal procedure serve to whittle away at the number of cases and 2) to inject repeated evaluation of the evidence to ensure the state does not abuse its power
Identify the standard of proof in criminal trials.
The standard of proof in criminal trials is “beyond a reasonable doubt”
Explain the standard of review in criminal cases.
The standard of review in criminal trials is “could a reasonable jury have so found.” Appellate judges show deference to those who were actually there at the trial because they are more capable of weighing the evidence before them than those reviewing the evidence through a transcript.
H: Suppose the legislature in your state enacted a law prohibiting left-handed writing, punishable by one year imprisonment. Is this a crime?
A crime is anything that lawmakers say is a crime… we’re not so concerned with this in criminal law as we are how a crime is different than a civil wrong.
What if the legislature passes a law, which it calls a “crime” to drive 66 miles per hour in a 65 per hour zone, also punishable by imprisonment. Is this a crime because the legislature so characterized it?
It’s a crime because, again, the legislature called it so. It’s distinguished from a civil crime because of the condemnation + consequences = punishment. “The essence of punishment… lies in the criminal conviction itself” → Gardner
What are the three “ingredients” of a crime?
Actus Reus + Mens Rea + Causation = crime
What is the distinction between the standard of factfinder (usually a jury) must apply and the standard an appellate court must follow after a conviction?
Appellate court in criminal cases → not the factfinder, that’s the jury’s role
For appellate courts → after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt
