Punishment / Proportionality / Legality

Question 1

What is the utilitarian justification generally

Answer 1

Create the greatest amount of good for the most people

Question 2

What are the 3 main benefits of punishment from a utilitarian perspective

Answer 2

General/Individual Deterrence; Incapacitation; Reform

Question 3

What is the general concept of the retributive justification

Answer 3

What did the person deserve? (“Just deserts”); Moral duty

Question 4

What is Positive Retributivism

Answer 4

A person should not be punished unless he deserves it, but if he does deserve it, the state is justified in punishing him as much as he deserves

Question 5

What is Negative Retributivism

Answer 5

The innocent should never be punished, and the punishment for the guilty should punish him accordingly

Question 6

What is denunciation / expressive theory

Answer 6

The law sends messages communicating what behavior is acceptable; stigma results from moral condemnation

Question 7

What happened in The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens?

Answer 7

Case where men on a boat kill a boy to eat, because they would die from starvation

Question 8

What was the rule from People v. Superior Court (Du)?

Answer 8

A trial court has broad discretion to determine whether to grant a defendant probation. (Court weighed 7 sentencing objectives)

Question 9

What are the two alternatives to punishment?

Answer 9

Restorative justice and transformative justice

Question 10

What is the MPC approach to sentencing?

Answer 10

§ 1.02(2)(a): the general approach is to render punishment proportionate to the gravity of offenses, achieve utilitarian goals, and avoid recidivism

Question 11

What is the retributive approach to proportionality of punishment?

Answer 11

The right amount of punishment is the amount that the offender deserves based on the offender’s moral blameworthiness (related to mental state) and the degree of harm inflicted by the crime

Question 12

What is the utilitarian approach to proportionality of punishment?

Answer 12

The right amount of punishment is the amount that is required to prevent crime such that the benefits to society outweigh the costs associated with the punishment

Question 13

What does the Constitution say about proportionality?

Answer 13

8th amendment - no cruel or unusual punishments (grossly disproportionate punishments)

Question 14

What was the rule from Ewing v. California? (Proportionality)

Answer 14

Sentencing a repeat felon to 25 years imprisonment under a state’s three strikes law does not violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.

Question 15

What is a “three-strikes” law?

Answer 15

A recidivism statute that punishes criminals that have prior offenses of certain categories

Question 16

What are the two major principles of legality?

Answer 16

1. No retroactive criminal lawmaking
2. Statutes must be sufficiently clear and specific to provide ordinary people fair notice of what conduct is prohibited

Question 17

What is the lenity doctrine?

Answer 17

Judicial interpretation of ambiguous statutes should be “biased in favor of the accused”

Question 18

What was the (no longer majority) rule from Commonwealth v. Mochan? (Legality)

Answer 18

Any unlawful act which directly injures or tends to injure the public morals or health of the community is indictable. Phone call harassment case.

Question 19

What was the takeaway from Keeler? (Legality)

Answer 19

Retroactive application of unforeseeable judicial enlargement of a criminal statute violates the legality principle (killing a viable fetus was unclear whether it was a human being)

Question 20

What is the “Desuetude” doctrine

Answer 20

Laws that are hardly ever enforced are said, by courts, to have lapsed, simply because they lack public support

Question 21

What is the void-for-vagueness doctrine?

Answer 21

A basis for invalidating a criminal statute that lacks sufficient definiteness, specificity, and/or clarity

Question 22

What was the rule from “In Re Banks” (Legality)

Answer 22

A criminal statute is not void for vagueness if it gives fair notice of the criminalized conduct and provides sufficient guidance to judges and defending lawyers, and is not void for overbreadth if there is an available interpretation that does not inadvertently criminalize permissible actions.

Question 23

What was the rule from Desertrain v. City of Los Angeles (Legality)

Answer 23

A municipal law prohibiting the use of automobiles as living quarters is unconstitutionally vague in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if the law fails to explicitly state what conduct is punishable